νζαν τῶν 


σι, τε. 
5 RAT oe ge 


C 


a, a 


δύ ἀπ ΚΝ 
Hine a Re) 
ee ay 


(> ee A'S 
LAs, oA Aisha 
7 Ae = 


Ὲ Es Ὶ 
ἵν τὸν 
1) ) 
yan 
ΜΡ ἰ 
᾿ ΄ 
‘sh 
Mae > | 
| 
Ν Π 
“1 ᾿ ᾿ 
rh ΤῊΝ ' 
ὟΝ 


Poh Tat: 


Hatt Wa At) γὴν 
ar 


et Pai I 


hk, ἐν 
if Analy 
‘ ran i ᾿ 


TEACHING 


Gext and Cranslation 


Gogether with Critical and Illustratibe Papers 
by Gminent Scholars 


REPRODUCED FROM 


The Sournal of Christian Philosophy 


CONTENTS 


ART 
I. AIAAXH TON AQAEKA ATIOSTOAQN, NYN IIPQTON EKAIAOMENH 


ὙΠῸ ΦΙΛΟΘΕΟΥ BPYENNIOY, MHTPOTOAITOY NIKOMHAETIAS 


1, TEACHING OF THE TWELVE APOSTLES, TRANSLATION 
By Professor S. STANHOPE ORRIS, Ph.D., Princeton, N. J. 


Ill. THE GENUINENESS, PRIORITY, SOURCE AND VALUE OF THE TEACHING 
By J. RENDEL HARRIS, M.A., Baltimore, Md. 


IV. THE PHRASEOLOGY OF 7HE TEACHING AS AN INDEX OF ITS AGE 
By ISAAC H. HALL, LL.B., Ph.D., Philadelphia, Pa. 


_V. COMMENTS ON 7HE TEACHING 
By ELIJAH R. CRAVEN, D.D., Newark, N. J. 


NEW YORK 
EDITED AND PUBLISHED BY J. A. PAINE 
ROOM 80 BIBLE HOUSE, ASTOR PLACE 


Lonpon: THE INTERNATIONAL NEWS Co., 11 BOUVERIE ST. (FLEET STREET) 


4 


‘Corvaicn7, 1884, BY τ oa PAINE 
Au rights reserved 


ee Cus. ἔν Green Printinc Co. 
τὰ and 76 Beekman Street 
NEW YORK > 


AIA AXH 


TON 4QAEKA ATOZTOAQN. 


TEACHING 


OF THE TWELVE APOSTLES. 


ARTICLE I. 
AI4AXH TON 4QAEKA AIOZTOAQN. 


ΝΥΝ ΠΡΩ͂ΤΟΝ EKAIAOMENH 
ΥΠπΠὸῸ ΦΙΔΟΘΕΟΥ͂ ΒΡΥΕΝΝΙΟΥ͂ 


μητροπολίτου Νικομηδείας 


Ζιδαχὴ Κυρίου διὰ τῶν δώδεκα ἀποστόλων τοῖς ἔθνεσιν. 


Κεφ. α΄. Ὁδοὶ δύο εἰσί, μία tas δωῆς καὶ μία τοῦ θανάτου, 
2 διαφορὰ δὲ πολλὴ μεταξὺ τῶν δύο ὁδῶν. Ἡ μὲν οὖν ὁδὸς 
3. τῆς δωῆς ἐστιν αὕτη: πρῶτον, ἀγαπήσει τὸν Θεὸν τὸν 
4 ποιήσαντά Ge: δεύτερον, τὸν πλησίον σου ws σεαυτόν" 

πάντα δὲ ὅσα ἐὰν θελήσῃΞ μὴ γίνεσθαί σοι, καὶ σὺ ἄλλῳ 
5 μὴ ποίει. Τούτων δὲ τῶν λόγων ἡ διδαχή ἐστιν αὕτη" 
6 ἘΕὐλογεῖτε rovs καταρωμένους ὑμῖν καὶ προσεύχεσθε ὑπὲρ 
τῶν ἐχθρῶν ὑμῶν, νηστεύετε δὲ ὑπὲρ τῶν διωκόντων 
vuas' ποία yap χάρις, ἐὰν ayanate τοὺς ἀγαπῶντας 
ὑμᾶς; οὐχὶ καὶ τὰ ἔθνη τὸ αὐτὸ ποιοῦσιν; ὑμεῖς δὲ ἀγα- 
πᾶτε TOUS μισοῦντας Duds καὶ οὐχ ἕξετε ἐχθρόν. Απέχου 


-- 


~ ~ ~ ᾽ ~ 2 , ~ 
8 τῶν σαρπικῶν nai κοσμικῶν ἐπιθυμιῶν. Eav tis σοι δῷ 
\ ’ b) ~ 
ῥάπισμα sis τὴν δεξιὰν σιαγόνα, στρέψον αὐτῷ παὶ τὴν 
χλλ 1 ἔσῃ τέλειοΞ- ἐὰν a even σέ ihiov & 
ἄλλην, nat ἔσῃ Tédetos: ἐὰν ἀγγαρεύσῃ σέ Tis μίλιον ἕν, 
? 1 ~ , aN ΄ , 7 
ὕπαγε μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ δύο: ἐὰν ἄρῃ tis τὸ ἱμάτιον σου, δὸς 
Ont ~ ? ~ 
αὐτῷ καὶ τὸν χιτῶνα" ἐὰν λάβῃ τιΞ ἀπὸ σοῦ TO σόν, μὴ 
2 2 \ , ~ ~ 
9 ἀπαίτει" οὐδὲ yap δύνασαι. Παντὶ τῷ αἰτοῦντί ce δίδου 
? ~ ~ 
καὶ μὴ ἀπαίτει: πᾶσι yap θέλει δίδοσθαι ὁ πατὴρ ἔῃ τῶν 
γα) , , ς \ \ \ ? 
το ἰδίων χαρισματωῶν. Maxapios 0 did0us κατα τὴν ἔἕντο- 
x , Ἂ a) ~ ΄ ἐστ is te, | r ~ λ 7 » > ᾿ \ 
τι Anv: ἀθῷο yap ἐστιν" oval τῷ λαμβάνοντι: εἰ μὲν yap 


‘fa PRINCETON 
Υ Ὄρος ἐλευ eects ξ 


κὸν 
<= 


SEMIN EBS. ee 


ey 
ὃ Ὁ τ τὴς 
εὐυσῶς ror as hae 


AREICEE IT. 
TEACHING OF THE TWELVE APOSTLES. 


TRANSLATED BY S. STANHOPE ORRIS, PH.D., 


Ewing Professor of Greek in the College of New Jersey, Princeton, N. J. 


Teaching of the Lord through the Twelve Apostles to the Nations. 


Cuarter I. There are Two Ways, one of Life and one of Death, 


Hn on 


on 


9 


and the difference between the Two Ways is great. 


THE Way oF LIFE. 
The Way of Life, then, is this: 


Duty toward God. 
First, Thou shalt love the God who made thee: 


Duty toward Man. 
Second, Thy neighbor as thyself; and all things whatsoever 
thou wouldst not have befall thee, do thou, too, not to another. 


And of these words the Teaching is this: 

The first commandment: Bless them that curse you, and pray 
for your enemies, and fast for them that persecute you; for 
what thank have ye if ye love them that love you? do not the 
nations also the same? but love ye them that hate you, and ye 
shall not have an enemy. 

Abstain from fleshly and worldly lusts. 

If one give thee a blow on the right cheek, turn to him the 
other also, and thou shalt be perfect; if any one press thee into 
service for one mile, go with him two; if one take away thy 
cloak, give him thy coat also; if one take from thee thine own, 
ask z# not back; for not even canst thou. 

Give to every one that asketh thee, and ask not back; for 
to all the Father wills that there be given of his own free gifts. 


το Blessed is he that giveth according to the commandment; for 


αὶ he is guiltless. Woe to him that receiveth; for if, indeed, one 


4I4AXH TON IB’ ATOSTOANN.—f'. γ΄. 


, ” , 2 ~ ” ς " 
χρείαν ἔχων λαμβάνει tis, αθῷοΞ ἕσται" ὁ δὲ μή χρεῖαν 
, ~ 
ἔχων δώσει δίκην, ἱνατί ἔλαβε καὶ sis τί, ἐν συνοχῇ δὲ 
, s 
γενόμενος ἐξετασθήσεται περὶ ὧν ἔπραξε, καὶ οὐκ ἐξελεύ- 
2 ~ , τ 2 ~ \ + , 
σεται ἐκεῖθεν péexypis OV ἀποδῷ TOV ἔσχατον nOOPAYTHY. 


12 ἀλλὰ nal wept τούτου δὴ εἴρηται: Ἱδρωσάτω ἡ ἐλεημο- 


σύνη Gov εἰς Tas χεῖράΞ σου, μέχρις ἂν γνῷ τένι O@s. 


Κεφ. β΄. Δευτέρα δὲ ἐντολὴ ths διδαχῆς Οὐ φονεύσεις, οὐ 


2 


, 2 , 7 , ? , 

μοιχεύσεις, OV παιδοφθορήσεις, οὐ πορνεύδειξ, οὐ πἨλέψειξ, 
2 2 , ? 

οὐ μαγεύσεις, οὐ φαρμαπεύσειΞκ, OV φονεύσεις τέκνον 

᾽ - Pat \ ? » 7 ? , 

ἐν φθορᾷ ovde ΣΕΥ ΠΟ ΤΩ ΠΣ ad Οὐκ ἐπιθυμησειβ 
\ ~ > / 7 

Ta τοῦ πλησίον, OVK ἕπιορπήσειδκ, οὐ φψευδομαρτυρήσειϑ, 
2 2 Pies 2 

οὐ παπολογήσεις, οὐ μνησικπαπκήσειΞ. Οὐ ἔσῃ διγνώμων 
7 

οὐδὲ δίγλωσσοΞ' παγὶΞ γὰρ θανάτου ἡ διγλωσσία. . OUx 

, ς a: / so 2 ὃ , > / (1λ \ ,ὕ 

ἔσται 6 AOyos σου ψευδής, οὐ κενός, ἀλλὰ μεμεστωμένοϑ 

5 7 

πράξει. Οὐκ ἔσῃ πλεονέκτης οὐδὲ ἅρπαξ οὐδὲ ὑποκριτὴς 
> ? ? 

οὐδὲ nanonOns οὐδὲ UxEepnpavos. Οὐ λήψῃ βουλὴν πονη- 

» ? 
pav κατὰ τοῦ πλησίον Gov. Οὐ μισήσεις πάντα ἄνθρω- 
2 > ξ a 

πον, ἀλλὰ ovs μὲν ἐλέγξεις, περὶ δὲ ὧν προσεύξῃ, ovs δὲ 
3 

ἀγαπήσεις ὑπὲρ τὴν ψυχήν σου. 


, , ~ ? \ ‘ ~ A ? A 
Κεφ. γ΄. Τέκνον pov, φεῦγε ἀπὸ mavros πονηροῦ καὶ ano 


2 


παντὸς ὁμοίου αὐτοῦ. Μὴ γένου ὀργίλος: ὁδηγεῖ yap ἡ 
ὀργὴ πρὸς τὸν φόνον" μηδὲ δηλωτὴξ μηδὲ ἐριστικὸς μηδὲ 
θυμικόΞ: ἐκ yap τούτων ἁπάντων φόνοι γεννῶνται. 
Τέκνον μου, μὴ γένου ἐπιθυμητήδ' ὁδηγεῖ yap ἡ ἐπιθυ- 
μία mpos τὴν πορνείαν" μηδὲ aigypodoyos μηδὲ ὑψηλόφ- 
θαλμος- ἐκ γὰρ τούτων ἁπάντων μοιχεῖαι γεννῶνται. 
Τέκνον μου, μὴ γίνου οἰωνοσκόπος' ἐπειδὴ ὁδηγεῖ εἶδ 
τὴν εἰδωλολατρείαν'" μηδὲ ἐπαοιδὸς μηδὲ μαθηματικὸς 
μηδὲ περικαθαίρων, μηδὲ θέλε αὐτὰ βλέπειν - ἐκ γὰρ τού- 
των ἁπάντων εἰδωλολατρεία γεννᾶται. Τέκνον μου, μὴ 
γίνου ψεύστης" ἐπειδὴ ὁδηγεῖ τὸ φεῦσμα sis τὴν κλοπήν. 
μηδὲ φιλάργυρος μηδὲ κενόδοξος" ἐκ γὰρ τούτων ἁπάν- 


12 


TEACHING OF THE TWELVE APOSTLES.—CH. I], 11. 5 


that hath need receiveth, he shall be guiltless; but he that hath 
not need, shall submit to trial wth reference to why he received 
and for what purpose, and, having come into custody, shall be ex- 
amined with reference to what he did,’ and shall not go forth 
thence until he have paid the last farthing. 

But concerning this, also, it hath been said: Let thine 
alms sweat in thy hands until thou know to whom to give. 


Cuap. II. And ¢he second commandment of the Teaching zs: 


2 


nm 


on 


Thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not commit adultery, thou shalt 
not corrupt boys, thou shalt not commit fornication, thou shalt 
not steal, thou shalt not use magic arts, thou shalt not practise 
sorcery, thou shalt not kill a child by abortion’ nor put it to 
death when born. Thou shalt not covet the things of thy 
neighbor, thou shalt not forswear thyself, thou shalt not bear 
false witness, thou shalt not speak evil, thou shalt not bear a 
grudge. Thou shalt not be double-minded nor double-tongued; 
for doubleness of tongue is a snare of death. Thy word shall 
not be false, nor empty, but fulfilled by deed. Thou shalt not 
be covetous, nor rapacious, nor a hypocrite, nor malicious, nor 
haughty. Thou shalt not take evil counsel against thy neigh- 
bor. Thou shalt not hate any man, but some thou shalt re- 
prove, and for some thou shalt pray, and some thou shalt love 
above thy life. 


Duty toward Self. 


Cuap. III. My child, flee from every evil zing, and from every 


thing like it. 

Be'not prone to anger, for anger leadeth to murder; nor 
jealous, nor contentious, nor passionate; for out of all these, 
murders are begotten. 

My child, be not one that lusteth, for lust leadeth to forni- 
cation; nor of foul speech, nor of leering eyes; for out of all 
these, adulteries are begotten. 

My child, be not an augur, since augury leadeth to idolatry; 
nor an enchanter; nor an astrologer; nor a purifier;* nor be 
willing to behold these things; for out of all these, idolatry is 
begotten. 

My child, be not a liar, since lying leadeth to theft, nor a 
lover of money, nor vain-glorious; for out of all these, thefts 
are begotten. 


Io 


II 


AI4AXH TON IB’ AMOSTOANN.—<6. 


τῶν κλοπαὶ γεννῶνται. Τέκνον pov, μὴ γίνου yoyyv- 
Gos: ἐπειδὴ ὁδηγεῖ sis τὴν βλασφημίαν: μηδὲ αὐθάδης 
μηδὲ πονηρόφρωγν" ἐκ γὰρ τούτων ἁπάντων βλασφημίαι 
γεννῶνται. Ἴσθι δὲ πραῦς, ἐπεὶ οἱ πραεῖς πληρονομή- 
σουσι τὴν γῆν. Γίνου μακρόθυμο καὶ ἐλεήμων καὶ ana- 
nos καὶ ἡσύχιος καὶ ἀγαθὸς nal τρέμων τοὺς λόγου διὰ 
παντός, οὗς ἤκουσαΞ. Οὐχ ὑψώσειΞ σεαυτὸν οὐδὲ δώσειϑ 
τῇ ψυχῇ σου Opacos. Οὐ πολληθήσεται ἡ ψυχή σου μετὰ 
ὑψηλῶν, ἀλλὰ μετὰ δικαίων καὶ ταπεινῶν ἀναστραφήσῃ. 
Τὰ συμβαίνοντά σοι ἐνεργήματα ὡς ἀγαθὰ προσδέξῃ, 
eid@s ὅτι ἄτερ Θεοῦ οὐδὲν γένεται. 


= , ~ ~ , \ , Ἂν 
Κεφ. δ. Téuvov μου, τοῦ λαλοῦντοΞκ σοι τὸν λογον τοῦ 


Io 


τι 


Θε ~ fa) , \ \ ιν ,ὔ , δὲ PrN ς 
εοῦ μνησθήσῃ νυπτὸΞ καὶ ἡμέρα, τιμήσειΞ δὲ αὐτὸν GS 
, a \ ς , ye ᾽ fap , , 3 
Κύριον : οθὲεν yap ἢ nupiotys λαλεῖται, ἐκεῖ Kupios ἔστιν. 
Poy gris al χάθν δμῖραν eanlmoo eye 
nentnoes δὲ nal ἡμέραν Ta πρόσωπα τῶν ἁγίων, iva 
, ἔα / 9 - ? 
émavanavyn τοῖς Aoyois αὐτῶν. Ov ποθήσεις σχίσμα, 
4 , a, τὰ 
εἰρηνεύσεις δὲ μαχομένου" πρινεῖΞ δικαίωϑ, οὐ λήψῃ πρόσ- 
> , , ? , 
ὥπον ἐλέγξαι ἐπὶ παραπτώμασιν. Ov διφυχήσει, πότε- 
2, an » \ ft A A \ a > / 
ρον ἔσται ἢ ov. Μη γίνου zpos μὲν to λαβεῖν ἐκτείνων 
"ἢ δ᾿ = \ Ὁ 
tas χεῖρα, πρὸ δὲ τὸ δοῦναι συσπῶν " ἐὰν ἔχῃς, διὰ τῶν 
-Ὁ ΓΑ ’ ¢ ~ ? , 
χειρῶν σου d@ces λυτρῶσιν ἁμαρτιῶν Gov. Ov διστα- 
nF, ~) ‘ , A > 
Geis δοῦναι οὐδὲ διδοὺΞ yoyyveEs* γνώσῃ yap Tis ἐστιν 
~ ~ ? / ? 2 , 
6 τοῦ μισθοῦ uahos avranodotns. Οὐκ ἀποστραφήσῃ 
, ἢ ’ ~ ? ~ 
τὸν ἐνδεόμενον, συγποινωνήσειξ δὲ παντα τῷ αδελφῷ 
3 5; ᾽ \ eed : , 4 
Gov καὶ οὐ» ἐρεῖς ἴδια εἴναι" εἰ yap ἕν τῷ ἀθανατῷ ποι- 
“ , ~ , aw = 7 > “ὦ 
νωνοέ ἐστε, πόσῳ μᾶλλον ἐν τοῖς θνητοῖς; Οὐ apesis τὴν 
Ἂν ΄, 2 » δ» 2 \ ~ ΄ 
χεῖρά σου ἀπὸ τοῦ υἱοῦ cov ἢ ἀπὸ THs θυγατροϑβ σου, 
ΕἸ 2 \ , , , ταν - ? 
ἀλλὰ ἀπὸ νεότητος διδάξεις τὸν φόβον τοῦ Θεοῦ. Ov 
, , ἊΝ ? 
ἐπιτάξεις δούλῳ Gov ἢ παιδίσπῃ, τοῖς ἐπὶ τὸν αὐτὸν Θεὸν 
2 \ , 
ἐλπίξουσιν, ἐν πικρίᾳ Gov, μήποτε οὐ μὴ φοβηθήσονται 
Ὁ ? , 2 Ἢ , 
τὸν ἐπ᾿ ἀμφοτέροις Θεόν: ov yap ἔρχεται κατὰ πρόσωπον 
2 > ae. ey \ ~ ~ 
καλέσαι, ἀλλ᾽ ep OVS TO πνεῦμα ἡτοίμασεν. Ὑμεῖς δὲ of 
- Ἂς ~ , ~ 
δοῦλοι ὑποταγήσεσθε Tos κυρίοιΞ ὑμῶν ws τύπῳ Θεοῦ ἐν 
; , , in , = 
αἰσχύνῃ καὶ φόβῳ. Μισήσεις πᾶσαν vroupiow καὶ πᾶν 


6 


ΤΊ 


TEACHING OF THE TWELVE APOSTLES.—CH. IV. 7 


My child, be not a murmurer, since murmuring leadeth to 
blasphemy; nor self-willed, nor evil-minded, for out of all 
these, blasphemies are begotten. 

But be meek, since the meek shall inherit the earth. Be 
longsuffering and pitiful and guileless and quiet and good, and 
continually trembling at the words which thou hast heard. 
Thou shalt not exalt thyself, nor give assurance to thy soul. 
Thy soul shall not be joined with lofty ones, but with righteous 
and lowly ones shalt thou hold converse. 

The events that befall thee, thou shalt accept as good, 
knowing that nothing cometh to pass without God. 


Cuap. IV. My child, him that speaketh to thee the word of God, 


thou shalt remember night and day, and shalt honor him as 
the Lord; for where* the sovereignty of the Lord is proclaimed, 
there is “te Lord. 

And thou shalt seek out daily the faces of the saints, that 
thou mayst rest upon their words. 

Thou shalt not be desirous of division, but shalt bring con- 
tending ozes to peace; thou shalt judge righteously; thou shalt 
not respect persons in reproving for transgressions. 

Thou shalt not hesitate whether //zs shall be or not. 

Be not ove that with reference to receiving stretcheth out 
the hands, but with reference to giving contracteth ¢hem: thou 
shalt give by thy hands a ransom, if thou have 7¢, for thy sins. 
Thou shalt not hesitate to give, nor, when giving shalt thou 
murmur ; for thou shalt know who is the good Recompenser 
of the offering. Thou shalt not turn away from him that is in 


_ want, but shalt share all things with thy brother, and shalt not 


B fe) 


say that they are thine own; for if ye are partakers in that 
which is immortal, how much more in the things which are 
mortal. 

Thou shalt not remove thy hand from thy son or from thy 
daughter, but from youth shalt teach them the fear of God. 

Thou shalt not lay commands in thy bitterness on thy 
bondman or maid-servant, who hope in the same God, lest 
perchance they shall not fear the God who is over both; for He 
cometh not to call according to appearance, but unto those 
whom the Spirit hath prepared. And ye, the slaves, shall, in 
modesty and fear, be subject to your masters as to a type of 
God. 


8 


12 


13 


14 


AIAAXH ΤΩΝ IB’ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩ»νΝ.--εἰ. «. 


ὃ μὴ ἀρεστὸν τῷ Κυρίῳ. Ov μὴ ἐγκαταλίπῃς ἐντολὰς 
Κυρίου, φυλάξεις δὲ ἃ παρέλαβες, μήτε προστιθεὶς μήτε 
ἀφαιρῶν. Ἐν ἐκπλησίᾳ ἐξομολογήσῃ τὰ παραπτώματα 
σου, καὶ οὐ προσελεύσῃ ἐπὶ προσευχήν σου ἐν συνειδήσει 
πονηρᾷ. Αὕτη ἐστὶν ἡ ὁδὸς THs Goons. 


~ , v ~ 
Κεφ. ε. Ἡ δὲ τοῦ θανάτου 660s ἐστιν αὕτη" πρῶτον πάν- 


9 , , Ie ~ 
2,3τῶν πονηρά ἔστι καὶ KHATAPAS μεστή" Povor, μοιχεῖαι, 


Io 


> , ~ ,ὔ ᾽ ~ ~ 
ἐπιθυμίαι, πορνεῖαι, nlomai, εἰδωλολατρεῖαι, payéiat, 
φαρμαπεῖαι, ἁρπαγαί, φευδομαρτυρίαι, ὑποκρίσει, διπλο- 
/ , 32 / 
napdia, δόλοκ, ὑπερηφανία, κακία, αὐθάδεια, πλεονεξία, 
" / uA ? 
αἰσχρολογία, δηλοτυπία, Opacutys, vibos, alagovera: 
τε ? a μι ὅν ἢ ? Ὁ ΡΣ 
διώκται ἀγαθῶν, pucovbrtes ἀληθειαν, ἀγαπῶντεξ φψεῦδο, 
2 / / ? / ? - 
οὐ γινώσποντεξ μισθὸν δικαιοσύνη, οὐ κολλώμενοι ἀγαθῷ 
Par , r ? ~ ? ᾽ hg BA: ΄ ? ? 
οὐδὲ κρίσει δικαίῳ, ἀγρυπνοῦντεξ OVK eis TO ἀγαθον, ἀλλ 
\ , τ \ wh , 
εἰς τὸ πονηρόν" ὧν μακρὰν mpavTNs Kal ὑπομονή, μάταια 
? ~ , ? / ? ~ 
ἀγαπῶντες, διώκοντες ἀνταπόδομα, OVX EhEObYTES πτω- 
, ? ~ ᾽ ? 
χόν, οὐ πονοῦντες ἐπὶ καταπονουμένῳ, OV γινώσποντεξπ 
\ 4 2 / ine ~ “ 
τὸν ποιήσαντα AUTOUS, Poveis τέμνων, POopEis tac patos 
~ ? , \ ΄ ᾿ς 
Θεοῦ, ἀποστρεφόμενοι τὸν ἔνδεόμενον, natanovovrtes 
\ , , , , ” 
tov OrA1Bopevov, πλουσίων παραηλητοι, πενητῶν ἄνομοι 
’ a \ / 
upitat, πανθαμάρτητοι: ῥυσθείητε, τέκνα, ἀπὸ τούτων 
,ὔ 
ἁπάντων. 


Κεφ. 5. Ὅρα μή tis σὲ πλανήσῃ ἀπὸ ταύτης τῆς ὁδοῦ τῆς 


2 


διδαχῆς, ἐπεὶ παρεκτὸς Θεοῦ oe διδάσπει. Ei μὲν γὰρ 
δύνασαι βαστάσαι ὅλον τὸν δυγὸν τοῦ Κυρίου, τέλειος 
ἔσῃ" εἰ δ᾽ οὐ δύνασαι, ὃ δύνῃ τοῦτο mote. Περὶ δὲ τῆς 
βρώσεως, ὃ δύνασαι βάστασον ἀπὸ δὲ τοῦ εἰδωλοθύτου 
λίαν πρόσεχε" λατρεία γάρ ἐστι Θεῶν νεκρῶν. 


A ~ . 
Κεφ. 2. Περὶ δὲ τοῦ βαπτίσματος, οὕτω βαπτίσατε" 


TEACHING OF THE TWELVE APOSTLES.—CH. V, VI. 9 


1 Thou shalt hate all hypocrisy and everything that ¢s not 
pleasing to the Lord. 

12 Do not in any wise forsake she commandments of ¢he Lord; 
but thou shalt guard what thou hast received, neither adding 
thereto nor taking therefrom. 

13 In 276 church thou shalt confess thy transgressions, and thou 
shalt not come to thy prayer with an evil conscience. 

14 This is the Way of Life. 


Tue Way oF DEATH. 

Cuap. V. And the Way of Death is this: 

2,3. +First of all, it is evil and full of curse; murders, adulteries, 
lusts, fornications, thefts, idolatries, magic practices, sorceries, 

4 rapines; false testimonies, hypocrisies, double-heartedness, de- 

5 ceit, haughtiness; malice, self-will, covetousness, filthy talking, 

6 jealousy, self-assurance, loftiness, boastfulness; persecutors 
of good men, hating truth, loving falsehood, not knowing the 
reward of righteousness, not joined to anything good nor to 
righteous judgment, watching not with a view to good but 

7 with a view to evil; far from whom are meekness and patience, 
loving vain things, pursuing a requital, not pitying a poor man, 
not toiling for one borne down with toil, not knowing Him 

8 that made them; murderers of children, destroyers of God’s 
handiwork; turning away from him that is in want, oppressing 
him that is afflicted, rich men’s advocates, poor men’s lawless 
judges; utter sinners. 

10 May ye be delivered, children, from all these. 


THE WAY OF THE TEACHING: 
Cuap. VI. See that no one cause thee to wander from this Way 
of the Teaching, since thus aloof from God doth he teach thee. 
2 For, if thou art able to bear the whole yoke of the Lord thou 
shalt be perfect; but if thou art not able, what thou art able 
that do. 
In regard to Meat and Drink. 
3 And concerning food, brook what thou art able; but of that 
which is sacrificed to idols beware exceedingly, for it is a 
worship of dead gods. 


In regard to Baptism. 
Cuap. VII. And concerning baptism, thus baptize ye: 


10 


AI4AXH TON IB’ AIOSTOAQN.—7’. θ΄. 


ταῦτα πάντα προειπόντες, βαπτίσατε sis TO ὄνομα τοῦ 
Πατρὸς καὶ τοῦ Υἱοῦ καὶ τοῦ ἁγίου ΠνεύματοΞ ἐν ὕδατι 
δῶντι. Ἐὰν δὲ μὴ ἔχῃς ὕδωρ ξῶν, sis ἄλλο ὕδωρ βάπτι- 
cov: εἰ δ᾽ οὐ δύνασαι ἐν ψυχρῷ, ἐν θερμῷ. Ἐὰν δὲ 
ἀμφότερα μὴ eyns, ἔτιχεον eis τὴν κεφαλὴν Tpis ὕδωρ εἰς 
ὄνομα Πατρὸς παὶ Υἱοῦ καὶ ἁγίου Πνεύματος. Πρὸ δὲ 
τοῦ βαπτίσματος προνηστευσάτω ὁ βαπτίξων καὶ ὁ βαπ- 
τιδόμενος καὶ εἴ tives ἄλλοι δύνανται" πελεύσειξ δὲ νη- 
στεῦσαι τὸν βαπτιξόμενον πρὸ pias ἢ δύο. 


Κεφ. ἡ. Αἱ δὲ νηστεῖαι ὑμῶν μὴ ἔστωσαν μετὰ τῶν ὑπο- 


Ἠριτῶν " νηστεύουσι γὰρ δευτέρᾳ σαββάτων καὶ πέμπτῃ" 
ὑμεῖς δὲ νηστεύσατε τετράδα καὶ παρασπευήν. Μηδὲ 
προσεύχεσθε ws οἱ ὑποκριταί, ἀλλ᾽ os ἐκέλευσεν ὁ Κύριος 
ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ αὐτοῦ, οὕτω προσεύχεσθε: Πάτερ ἡμῶν 
ὁ ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ, ἁγιασθήτω τὸ ὄνομά σου, ἐλθέτω ἡ 
βασιλεία σου, γενηθήτω τὸ θέλημά Gov ws ἐν οὐρανῷ uai 
ἐπὶ yijs* τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸν ἐπιούσιον Sos ἡμῖν σήμερον 
καὶ ἄφες ἡμῖν τὴν ὀφειλὴν ἡμῶν ὡδ καὶ ἡμεῖς ἀφίεμεν τοῖς 
ὀφειλέταις ἡμῶν, καὶ μὴ εἰσενέγπῃξ ἡμᾶξ Eis πειρασμόν, 
ἀλλὰ ῥῦσαι ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ: ὅτι σοῦ ἐστιν ἡ δύ- 
Vaplis nal ἡ δόξα &is TOUS ai@vas. Tpis τῆς ἡμέραΞ οὕτω 
προσεύχεσθε. 


Κεφ. θ΄. Περὶ δὲ τῆς εὐχαριστίας, οὕτως εὐχαριστήσατε" 


2 


~ ~ ? ~ ΄ 
πρῶτον περὶ τοῦ ποτηρίου: Ευχαριστοῦμέν σοι, Πάτερ 
ς ~ δι οἷν ~ Ὁ ? , \ ~ ΄ = 
ἡμῶν, ὑπὲρ THS ayias ἀμπέλου Ζαβὶδ τοῦ maidos Gov, Hs 
> / Cele, \ 2 = , Ἄν τ , 3 
éyv@pioas ἡμῖν δια Ἰησοῦ τοῦ ma1idos σου" σοὶ ἡ δοξα sis 
τοὺς ai@vas. Περὶ δὲ τοῦ κλάσματοΞς- Εὐχαριστοῦμέν 
, ς ~ ς ~ ~ , τὰ 3 
σοι, Πατερ ἡμῶν, ὑπὲρ THs Cons καὶ γνώσεωϑ, ns ἐγνώρι- 
C iw ΝΆ » ~ , A ς / ’ \ 
casnpiv dia Ingo’ τοῦ maidos σου" σοὶ ἡ δοξα esis TOUS 
7 ~ 4 3 - : : 
aiavas. Ὥσπερ ἣν τοῦτο κλάσμα διεσπορπισμένον ἐπά- 
» ? > 
νῷ τῶν ὁρέων nat συναχθὲν ἐγένετο ἕν, οὕτω συναχθήτω 
2 ~ ~ ~ > 
σου ἡ ἐκπηλησία ἀπὸ τῶν περάτων THS γῆς sis THY σὴν 
~ ?. * 
βασιλείαν" ὅτι σοῦ ἐστιν ἡ δόξα καὶ ἡ δύναμις διὰ Ἰησοῦ 


TEACHING OF THE TWELVE APOSTLES.—CH. VII, 1Χ. τι 


Having first said all these things, baptize into the name of 
the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living 
water. But if thou have not living water, baptize into other 
water; and if thou canst not in cold, in warm. But if thou 
have not either, pour out water thrice upon the head, into the 
name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit. But before the 
baptism, let the baptizer and the baptized " fast, and any others, 
if they can; and thou shalt command the baptized " to fast one 
or two days before. 


In regard to Fasting and Prayer. 


Cuap. VIII. But let not your fastings be with the hypocrites; 


for they fast on δε Second Day of the week and on “he Fifth; but 
do ye fast ste Fourth and Preparation.* 

Neither pray ye as the hypocrites, but as the Lord com- 
manded in his gospel, thus pray: 

Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name. Thy 
kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so also on 
earth. Give us to-day our daily bread, and forgive us our 
debt as we, too, forgive our debtors. And bring us not into 
temptation, but deliver us from evil; for thine is the power 
and the glory for ever. 

Pray thus three times in the day. 


In regard to the Lord’s Supper. 


Cuap. IX. And concerning the Eucharist, thus give thanks. 


4 


First, concerning the cup: 

We thank Thee, our Father, for the holy vine of David, 
thy servant, which thou hast made known to us through Jesus 
thy servant; to Thee de the glory forever. 

And concerning the broken dread: 

We thank Thee, our Father, for the life and knowledge 
which Thou hast made known to us through Jesus thy ser- 
vant; to Thee de the glory forever. Just as this, a broken 
piece, was scattered upon the hills, and was gathered together 
and became one, so let thy church be gathered together from 
the ends of the earth into thy kingdom; for thine is the 
glory and the power through Jesus Christ forever. 


12 


AIAAXH ΤΩΝ IB’ ATIOSTOAQN.—1. τα΄. 


Χριστοῦ eis τοὺΞ ai@vas. ΜηδεὶΞ δὲ φαγέτω μηδὲ πιέτω 
? \ - ? , ς - 2 ᾽ ς , .» 
ἀπὸ THS ευχαριστίαΞ ὑμῶν, αλλ οἱ βαπτισθὲντεϑξ eis OVOUA 
/ , ~ 
Κυρίου καὶ yap περὶ τούτου εἴρηκεν ὁ Kupios: Μὴ δῶτε 


ἣν, EF, ~ 
TO ἅγιον TOS πυσί. 


Κεφ. τ. Mera δὲ τὸ ἐμπλησθῆναι ovtws εὐχαριστήσατε" Ev- 


2 


» ΄ δ ε ~ ἢ ᾽ ’ , 
χαριστοῦμέν σοι, Πατερ ἅγιε, ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἁγίου ovopatos 
τ , 3 ~ ~ 
σου, οὗ κατεσκήνωσα ἐν Tais παρδίαιΞ ἡμῶν, καὶ ὑπὲρ 
» ? τ ᾽ , 
τῆς γνωώσεωΞ καὶ πίστεως καὶ ἀθανασία, nS Eyv@pIGas 
ς τι V2. ~ ~ / \ ς le , \ ./~ 
ἡμῖν δια Ἰησοῦ τοῦ maidos σου" σοὶ ἡ δοξα Eis TOUS αἰώ- 
’ δ , ΄ 
vas. Σύ, δέσποτα παντοκράτορ, ἕκτισαΞ τὰ πάντα ἕνεκεν 
ὦ ΑΥ̓͂ \ ~ 2 
τοῦ OVOMATOS σου, τροφήν TE καὶ ποτὸν ἐδωπαξ TOIS ἀν- 
ΡΟ δ 3 , 4 
θρώποιΞ sis ἀπόλαυσιν ἵνα σοι εὐχαριστήσωσιν, ἡμῖν δὲ 
μὴ Ἁ / 
ἐχαρίσω πνευματικὴν τροφὴν NAL ποτὸν παὶ GWNY αἰώντον 
~ , \ / ? ~ ' 
διὰ τοῦ παιδόΞ Gov. Πρὸ πάντων εὐχαριστοῦμέν σοι ὅτι 
~ , = Ε- , 
δυνατὸ εἶ" σοὶ ἡ δόξα eis tous αἰῶνας. Μνήσθητι, Κύριε, 
~ > , nae seed aya ? ‘ \ 
THs ἐγοιλησίαΞ σου τοῦ ῥύσασθαι αὐτὴν ἀπὸ MaVTOS πονή- 
~ ~ 2 \ ~ ᾽ , / 
pow καὶ τελειῶσαι αὐτὴν ἐν TH ἀγάπῃ Gov, καὶ σύναξον 
ἅπαν ’ xy , ? \ δ: β 
αὐτὴν απὸ τῶν τεσσάρων ἀνέμων, τὴν ἀἁγιασθεῖσαν eis 
\ ¢ 2) 8 te ~ 9 
τὴν σὴν βασιλείαν, ἣν ἡτοίμασαΞ αὐτῇ" ott σοῦ ἐστιν ἡ 
᾿ς ΄ Π ,»ν 2 
δύναμις καὶ ἡ δόξα &is tovs αἰῶναΞ. Ἐλθέτω yapis παὶ 
, = \ ~ ~ 
παρελθέτω ὁ κοσμοΞ οὗτοΞ. Ὡσαννὰ τῷ υἱῷ Δαβίδ. Et 
or / 2 ? 
Tis ay1os ἐστιν, ἐρχέσθω: εἴ Tis οὐκ ἔστι, μετανοείτω: 
, 2 “4 - A i? 3 ,ὔ 2 
μαραναθα. μὴν. Τοῖς δὲ mpopyrais ἐπιτρέπετε evya- 
ριστεῖν ὅσα θέλουσιν. 


, a 5 : \ / ~ ~ 
Keg. 1a. “Os av οὖν ἐλθὼν διδάξῃ ὑμᾶΞ ταῦτα πάντα, τὰ 


4 


προειρημένα, δέξασθε αὐτόν" ἐὰν δὲ αὐτὸς ὁ διδάσκων 
στραφεὶΞ διδάσκπῃ ἄλλην διδαχὴν sis τὸ καταλῦσαι, μὴ 
αὐτοῦ ἀκούσητε" eis δὲ τὸ προσθεῖναι δικαιοσύνην καὶ 
γνῶσιν Κυρίου, δέξασθε αὐτὸν ws Κύριον. Περὶ δὲ 
τῶν ἀποστόλων καὶ προφητῶν κατὰ τὸ δόγμα τοῦ εὐαγ- 
γελίου, οὕτω ποιήσατε. Ids δὲ ἀπόστολος ἐρχόμενος πρὸς 
ὑμᾶς δεχθήτω ὡς ΚύριοΞ- οὐ μενεῖ δὲ ἡμέραν μίαν ἐὰν 
δὲ ἦ χρεία, καὶ τὴν ἄλλην" τρεῖς δὲ ἐὰν μείνῃ, ψευδοπρο- 
φήτηΞ ἐστέν. ᾿ξερχόμενος δὲ ὁ ἀπόστολος μηδὲν λαμβαν- 


5 


TEACHING OF THE TWELVE APOSTLES.—CH. X, ΧΙ 13 


But let no one eat or drink of your Eucharist, but those 
that have been baptized into the name of the Lord; for con- 
cerning this the Lord hath said: Give not that which is holy 
to the dogs. 


Cuap. X. And after being filled, thus give thanks: 


2 


We thank Thee, holy Father, for thy holy name, which 
Thou hast caused to dwell in our hearts, and for the knowl- 
edge and faith and immortality, which Thou hast made known 
to us through Jesus thy servant; to Thee de the glory forever. 
Thou, Almighty Sovereign, didst create the universe for thy 
name’s sake; both food and drink Thou gavest men for enjoy- 
ment, that they might give thanks to Thee; but to us Thou hast 
graciously given spiritual food and drink and life eternal through 
thy servant. Before all things, we thank Thee that Thou art 
mighty: to Thee de the glory forever. Remember, Lord, thy 
church, to deliver it from every evil and to make it perfect in 
thy love; and do Thou gather it from the four winds, the sanc- 
tified church, into thy kingdom, which Thou hast prepared for 
it; for thine is the power and the glory forever. Let gracecome, 


and let this world pass away. Hosanna to the Son of David. 


If any one is holy, let him come: if any one is not, let him re- 
pent: Maranatha. Amen. 
But permit the prophets to express what thanks they wish. 


In regard to Apostles and Prophets. 


Cuap. XI. Whoever, then, shall come and teach all these things, 


the things aforesaid, receive him; but if the teacher himself 
turn and teach another doctrine to the destruction of ¢hzs, do 
not hear him; but 27 ἦε teacheth to the promotion of righteous- 
ness and knowledge of ¢he Lord, receive him as ¢he Lord. 

And with reference to the apostles and prophets in accord- 
ance with the ordinance of the gospel, act thus. And let every 
apostle that cometh to you be received as the Lord; but he 
shall remain, not one day, but, if there be need, the next also; 
but if he remain three days, he is a false prophet. And let the 


-apostle, when he goeth forth, take nothing except bread ¢o 


14 


Io 


AI4AXH TON IB’ AMOSTOAQN.—if’. ιγ΄. 


,ὕ ᾽ Δ er e ? ~ »\ A 2 , o 
ét@ εἰμὴ ἄρτον éws ov αὐλισθῇ éav δὲ ἀργύριον αἰτῇ, 
-- , , ~ > 
pevdonpogpytns ἐστί. Kai πάντα προφήτην λαλοῦντα ἐν 
5) , ᾽ ἂν - 
πνεύματι οὐ πειράσετε οὐδὲ διακρινεῖτε" πᾶσα γὰρ ἁμαρ- 
, / [χά Nase οὐ , ? ? t ? 
tia ἀφεθήσεται, αὕτη δὲ ἡ ἁμαρτία οὐκ ἀφεθήσεται. Οὐ 
is δὲ ὁ λαλῶν ἐν πνεύματι προφήτης ἐστίν, ἀλλ᾽ ἐὰν ἐΐ 
mais δὲ ὁ ματι προφήτη : ἂν ἔχῃ 
/ 9 Ὁ Bb. , , 
τοὺς τρόπους Κυρίου. Axo οὖν τῶν τρόπων γνωσθήσεται 
’ - , 
ὁ pevdoxpogntns καὶ ὁ mpopytns. Kai mas mpopytns opt- 
, ? , Ἂς 113 2? τῶ > 
Cov τράπεξαν ἐν πνεύματι, οὐ φάγεται an αὐτῆ, εἰδὲ 
> ~ , / 
μήγε ψευδοπροφήτης ἐστέ: mas δὲ mpopytns διδάσκων THY 
>) ͵7 5 a GQ 7 ‘act / ᾽ , 
ἀλήθειαν, εἰ a διδασπει ov ποιξῖ, pEevdompopHtys ἕστί. 
ic 2 Ἵ ~ ᾽ 
Πᾶς δὲ προφήτης δεδοκιμασμένος, alnOivos, ποιῶν sis 
, \ 3 , ~ 
μυστήριον κοσμικὸν éxudynoias, μὴ διδάσκων δὲ ποιεῖν 
δ ᾽ Ke las , eR Ww \ x 
ὅσα AUTOS ποιεῖ, OV UpLONGETaL EP ὑμῶν μετὰ Θεοῦ yap 
\ ’ ᾽ ? ~ 
ἔγει τὴν κρίσιν ὡσαύτως yap ἐποίησαν nat ot ἀρχαῖοι 
~ ‘ eM) 2, 2 ΄ 2 , 
προφῆται. “Os δ᾽ av εἴπῃ év πνεύματι" Aos μοι ἀργύρια 
ἤν , ? 3 ’ ? ~ 9 \ A Ve ah 
2 ἕτερά τινα, OVX ἀκπουσεσθε αὐτοῦ: ἕαν δὲ περὶ AlAwY 


Ψ 2, ~ ? 
ὑστερούντων εἴπῃ δοῦναι, μηδεὶΞ αὐτὸν κρινέτω. 


Κεφ. ιβ΄. ΠᾶΞ δὲ ὁ ἐρχόμενοΞ ἐν ὀνόματι Κυρίου δεχθήτω, 


” \ , ? \ , ’ \ 
ἔπειτα δὲ δοκπιμασαντὲΞ aAUVTOV γνωσεσθε: σύνεσιν yap 
° ? , ᾽ i > 
ἕξετε δεξιὰν ual ἀριστεράν. Εἰμὲν wapodios ἐστιν ὁ &p- 
, a 3 τῶν "ΒΝ , ? A A Ν 
χομενοϑβ, βοηθεῖτε αὐτῷ οσον δυνασθε: οὐ μενεῖ δὲ προϑ 
ς » . \ , μ᾿ ~ δὰ δ ὙΝ chew? , ᾽ \ / 
ὑμᾶξ εἰ μή δυο ἡ TPEis ἡμέραξ, Eav ἢ avayun. Hi δὲ θέλει 
Ἂν ~ ~ ΄ 
mpos ὑμᾶΞ παθῆσαι, Teyvitns ὦν, ἐργαξέσθω καὶ φαγέτω:" 
4 2 3, » 
εἰ δὲ οὐκ ἔγχει τέχνην, κατὰ τὴν σύνεσιν ὑμῶν προνοήσατε, 
~ \ 2 \ 4 ¢ ~ , 9 
mas μὴ apyos μεθ᾽ ὑμῶν δήσεται ypiotiavos. Εἰ δ᾽ οὐ 
, i] ~ , , ? ~ 
θέλει οὕτω ποιεῖν, χριστέμπορός ἐστι" προσέχετε ἀπὸ τῶν 


/ 
τοιουτῶν. 


Κεφ. ιγ΄. Πᾶς δὲ προφήτηΞ ἀληθινός, θέλων καθῆσαι mpos 


2 


ὑμᾶς, ἄξιός ἐστι THS τροφῆς αὐτοῦ. Ὡσαύτως διδάσκαλος 
ἀληθινός ἐστιν ἄξιος καὶ αὐτός, ὥτπερ ὁ ἐργάτης, τῆς τρο- 
φῆϑ αὐτοῦ. Πᾶσαν οὐτ' ἀπαρχὴν γεννημάτων ληνοῦ παὶ 
ἅλωνος, βοῶν τε καὶ προβάτων λαβὼν δώσεις tots προ- 
φήταις" αὐτοὶ yap εἰσιν οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς ὑμῶν. Ἑὰν δὲ μὴ 
ἔχητε προφήτην, δότε τοῖς πτωχοῖς. Ἐὰν σιτίαν ποιῇς, τὴν 


on 


Io 


TEACHING OF THE TWELVE APOSTLES.—CH. XII, XIII. τὸ 


suffice until he lodge; but if he ask money, he is a false prophet. 
And no prophet that speaketh in ‘He Spirit, shall ye try 
or judge; for every sin shall be forgiven, but this sin shall 
not be forgiven. Not every one, however, that speaketh in ¢he 
Spirit,’"is a prophet, but only if he have the ways of 2.4 Lord. 
From their ways, then, shall the false prophet and the prophet 
be known. And no prophet that in ¢#e Spirit commandeth 
a meal, will eat of it, else he is a false prophet; and every 
prophet that teacheth the truth, if he doeth not what he teach- 
eth, is a false prophet. And no prophet, approved, true, 
acting with a view to the world-mystery of the church, but 
not teaching ofers to do what he himself doeth, shall be 
judged in your presence; for with God he hath his judgment; 
for in like manner did the ancient prophets also. But whoever 
in the Spirit shall say: Give me money, or something else, ye 
shall not hear him; but if he bid you give for others that are 
in want, let no one judge him, 


Cuap. XII. And let every one that cometh in tHe name of the 


Lord be received, and afterward ye shall prove and know him; 
for ye shall possess understanding right and left. If he that 
cometh is a traveller, help him as much as you can; however, 
he shall not remain with you, except for two or three days, if 
need be. But if he wisheth to reside with you, being an arti- 
san, let him work and eat; but if he hath not a trade, provide, 
according to your understanding, that, as a Christian, he shall 
not live with you idle. But if he doth not wish so to do, he is 
one that maketh a gain of Christ: beware of such. 


In regard to Tithing. 


Cuap. XIII. But every true prophet that wisheth to reside with 


2 


5 


you, is worthy of his food. In like manner a true teacher, 
himself also is worthy of his food, just as the workman. 

Every first-fruit, then, of ¢e products of wine-press and 
threshing-floor, of oxen and of sheep, thou shalt take and give 
to the prophets; for they are your high-priests. 

But if ye have not a prophet, give to the poor. 

If thou make a baking of bread, take and give the first-fruit 


16 


AIAAXH TON IB’ AMOZSTOAQN.—i6. τε΄. 15. 


2 , ¢ ΄ 

ἀπαρχὴν λαβὼν δὸς nata τὴν ἐντολήν. Ὡσαυτῶβ περά- 
“ “> , ? be Maris \ \ \ iS 

μιον οἴνου ἢ ἐλαίου avoigas, τῆν ἀπαρχὴν λαβὼν dos τοῖϑ 

2 ~ ν» , 
προφήταις" ἀργυρίου δὲ καὶ ἱματισμοῦ καὶ παντοβ Ἀτημα- 
Ν \ ? \ ¢ a” Ψ, \ \ \ 
tos λαβὼν τὴν ἀπαρχὴν ws av Gor δόξῃ, dos κατα τὴν 
ἐντολήν. 


Κεφ. τδ΄. Κατὰ κυριακὴν δὲ Κυρίου συναχθέντες πλάσατε 


5) , = , \ 
ἄρτον καὶ εὐχαριστήσατε προσεξομολογησαάμενοι τὰ παρ- 
απτώματα ὑμῶν, ὅπωΞ καθαρὰ ἡ θυσία ὑμῶν ἢ. Tas δὲ 

᾽ ~ e , ? ~ \ 

ἔγων τὴν ἀμφιβολίαν μετὰ τοῦ ἑταίρου αὐτοῦ uy συνελ- 
θέτω ὑμῖν, Ews οὗ διαλλαγῶσιν, iva μὴ κοινωθῇ ἡ θυσία 
ς ~ [χά , 3 ae ~ ς \ / 2. ‘ 
ὑμῶν αὕτη yap ἐστιν ἡ ῥηθεῖσα ὑπὸ Κυρίου: Ev παντὶ 
’ A / / , ’ é tA 
τόπῳ nal χρόνῳ προσφέρειν μοι θυσίαν καθαραν" ort 
\ , aye , , ι TOF , 
βασιλεὺΞ péyas εἰμί, λέγει Kupios, καὶ TO ovopfa μου θαυ- 
μαστὸν ἐν τοῖΞ ἐθνεσι. 


, , 3 e a ’ ΄ ‘ , 
Keg. τε. Xeipotrovncare οὖν ἑαυτοῖΞ ἐπισποπουϑβ nat διαπο- 


5: - Tr , ” Is qi tS ͵ 
vous a&tovs τοῦ Κυρίου, avdpas πραεῖξΞ καὶ apilapyvupous 
3 » ~ ~ 
nat ἀληθεῖς καὶ δεδοκιμασμένουΞ: ὑμῖν yap λειτουργοῦσι 
᾽ \ ~ ~ 
καὶ αὐτοὶ τὴν λειτουργίαν τῶν προφητῶν nai διδασκα- 
Ξ 2 , rf ᾽ 
λων. Μὴ οὖν ὑπερίδητε avTOVS* αὐτοὶ yap εἰσιν οἱ TETL 
~ \ ~ ~ 
μημένοι ὑμῶν μετὰ TOV προφητῶν καὶ διδασκάλων. 
2 , \ ? , 3 \ > ~ ? ? > > , Cis 
Eleyyete δὲ αλλήλουβ μὴ ἕν οργῇ, αλλ ἕν εἰρήνῃ, ws 
» > ? Ἐφ nS 
ἔχετε ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ: καὶ παντὶ ἀστοχοῦντι κατὰ τοῦ 
ἑτέρου μηδεὶς λαλείτω μηδὲ παρ᾽ ὑμῶν anové Υ ὗ 
ρου μηδεὶ ito μηδὲ παρ ὑμῶν AXOVETW, EWS οὗ 
, \ \ ~ 
μετανοήσῃ. Tas δὲ εὐχὰς ὑμῶν καὶ tas ἐλεημοσύναΞ καὶ 
’ \ / id ΄ » 
πάσα Tas πράξεις οὕτω ποιήσατε, ws ἔχετε ἐν τῷ εὐαγ- 
, ~ re , ¢ ~ 
γελίῳ τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν. 


Κεφ. το΄. Γρηγορεῖτε ὑπὲρ τῆΞ Gans ὑμῶν" ot λύχνοι ὑμῶν 


2 


Ga 


\ , 2 , ~ 
μὴ σβεσθήτωσαν, καὶ at ὀσφύες ὑμῶν μὴ ἐκλυέσθωσαν, 
Aha γίνεσθε ἕτ - οὐ γὰρ οἵδ wv ὦ ee 
ἀλλὰ yiv ἕτοιμοι" οὐ yap οἶδατε τὴν ὥραν, ἐν ἧ ὁ 
7 ~ 3, ~ = ~ 
Κύριος ἡμῶν ἔρχεται. ΠυκνῶΞ δὲ συναχθήσεσθε δητοῦν- 
2 , a ὦ ~ ? 
res Ta ἀνήκοντα tais ψυχαῖς ὑμῶν: ov yap ὠφελήσει 
~ ~ le ~ ~ oe 
ὑμᾶς ὁ RAS χρόνος THS πίστεωΞ ὑμῶν, ἐὰν μὴ Ev TH ἐσχάτῳ 
~ ~ 3. \ - - , 
καιρῷ τελειωθῆτε. Ev yap ταῖΞ ἑσχαταιξ ἡ μέραις πληθυν- 


TEACHING OF THE TWELVE APOSTLES.—CH. XIV-XVI. 17 


according to the commandment. In like manner, on opening 
a jar of wine or oil, take and give the first-fruit to the prophets; 
and of money and clothing and every possession, take the first- 
fruit, as it may seem good to thee, and give according to the 
commandment. 


In regard to Assembling on the Lord’s Day. 


Cuap. XIV. And every Lord’s Day gather yourselves together, 


and break bread and give thanks, after having also confessed 
your transgressions, that your sacrifice may be pure. 

But let no one that is at variance with his fellow assemble 
with you, until they be reconciled, that your sacrifice may not 
be profaned; For this is the one that was commanded by “He 
Lord: In every place and time, offer Me a pure sacrifice; for I 
am a great King, saith ‘he Lord, and my name is wonderful 
among the nations. 


Ln regard to Bishops and Deacons. 


Cuap. XV. Choose, therefore, for yourselves bishops and deacons 


worthy of the Lord, men meek and free from the love of money, 
and true and proved; for they, too, render you the service of 
the prophets and teachers. Do not, then, despise them; for 
together with the prophets ἀπά: teachers, they are your honored 
ones. 

And reprove one another, not in anger, but in peace, as ye 
have 7¢ in the gospel; and to every one that acteth amiss against 
another, let no one speak, and let him not hear from you until 
he repent. 

But your prayers and alms and all deeds so do, as ye have 
# in the gospel of our Lord. 


In regard to Last Things. 


Cuap. XVI. Watch for your life; let your lamps not be quenched, 


and your loins not be loosed, but be ye ready; for ye know 
not the hour in which our Lord cometh. 

And ye shall often be gathered together seeking the things 
which become your souls; for the whole time of your faith will 
not profit you, if ye be not made perfect in the last time. 

For in the last days the false prophets and the corrupters 


18 


AI4AXH TON IB’ AMOZSTOAQN.—19. 


2 
θήσονται οἱ ψευδοπροφῆται καὶ οἱ φθορεῖς καὶ στραφή- 
σονται τὰ πρόβατα eis λύκους καὶ ἡ ἀγάπη στραφήσεται 
eis uigos’ αὐξανούσηκ yap τῆς ἀνομίας, μισήσουσιν ἀλλή- 
λους καὶ διώξουσι καὶ παραδώσουσι, καὶ τότε φανήσεται 
6 κοσμοπλάνοξ as υἱὸς Θεοῦ καὶ ποιήσει σημεῖα καὶ τέρα- 
τα, καὶ ἡ γῆ παραδοθήσεται eis χεῖραϑ αὐτοῦ, καὶ ποιήσει 
ἀθέμιτα, ἃ οὐδέποτε γέγονεν ἐξ αἰῶνος. Τότε ἥξει ἡ πτί. 
Gis τῶν ἀνθρώπων sis τὴν πύρωσιν THS δοκιμασίαΞ καὶ 
σπανδαλισθήσονται πολλοὶ καὶ ἀπολοῦνται, ot δὲ ὑπομεί- 
vavres ἐν τῇ πίστει αὐτῶν σωθήσονται Ux αὐτοῦ τοῦ 
καταθέματοΞ. Καὶ τότε φανήσεται τὰ σημεῖα τῆς ἀληθείας" 
πρῶτον, σημεῖον ἐκμπετάσεως ἐν οὐρανῷ, εἶτα σημεῖον φω- 
νῇς σάλπιγγοϑ καὶ τὸ τρίτον ἀνάστασις νεκρῶν" οὐ πάν- 
τῶν δέ, ἀλλ᾽ ws ἐρρέθη - Ἥξει ὁ ΚύριοΞ καὶ mavres οἱ ἅγιοι 
per αὐτοῦ. Τότε ὄψεται ὁ κόσμοΞ τὸν Κύριον ἐρχόμενον 
ἐπάνω τῶν νεφελῶν τοῦ οὐρανοῦ. 


TEACHING OF THE TWELVE APOSTLES.—CH. XVI. 19 


shall be multiplied, and the sheep shall be turned into wolves, 
and love shall be turned into hate; for as lawlessness increas- 
eth, they shall hate one another, and persecute and betray, and 
then shall appear the world-deceiver as the Son of God, and 
shall do signs and wonders, and the earth shall be delivered 
into his hands, and he shall do iniquitous things which have 
never been done since ¢he world began. 

4 Then shall the human creation come into the fire of trial, 
and many shall be caused to stumble and shall perish; but 
they that endure in their faith shall be saved from under the 
curse itself. 

5 And then shall appear the signs of the truth; first, se sign 
of an opening in heaven, then ¢/e sign of δε sound of a trum- 
pet, and third, ¢#e resurrection of ¢he dead; not of all, however, 
but as was said: The Lord shall come and all the saints with 

6 Him. Then shall the world see the Lord coming upon the 
clouds of heaven. 


NOTES. 


1 T.e., with reference to what he received. 
2 The phrase ἐν φθορᾷ indicates that drugs were the means employed. 
3 What is here forbidden is some superstitious rite of purification. 
The Septuagint reads, in Dewt., xviii, 10: ‘‘ There shall not be found in thee one that purifieth 
(περικαθαίρων) his son or his daughter with fire.” 
Stobaeus says that the following line of Euripides, 
θάλασσα κλύζει πάντα τ᾽ ἀνθρώπων κακά, 
‘** The cleansing sea removes all human ills,” 


has reference to superstitious men, who purify themselves (περικαθαίρονται) in the sea. 

Theophrastus says of a certain man, that, “ He would seem to be of those who are scrupulous 
in sprinkling themselves with sea-water; and if ever he observes any one feasting on garlic at the 
cross-roads, he will go away, pour water over his head, and, summoning the priestesses, bid 
them carry a squill or a puppy round him for purification (περικαθᾶραι).᾽" 

4 ὅθεν... ἐκεῖ = In him by whom the sovereignty of the Lord is proclaimed, in him is the 
Lord. 

5 ὃ BamtiGouevos=the candidate for baptism. 

5 Friday. 

7T.e. ‘Every prophet that professeth to speak in the Spirit, ye shall receive as one that 
speaketh in the Spirit; otherwise ye may sin against the Spirit,—a sin which shall not be for- 
given. Not every one, however, that professeth to speak in the Spirit, is a prophet, as ye shall - 
afterward know from his ways. But let every one that professeth to come in the name of the 
Lord be received in accordance with his profession, and afterward ye shall prove and know 
him.’ 


20 SCRIPTURE PARALLELS. 
SCRIPTURE PARALLELS. 
OLD TESTAMENT. 
OBITS catoratelers ον a eye's if CLEA G ASKIN SGU AITO ciate wale ciel eye Exodus, XX, 15, 16 
Ch. i, 2....2£%., xviii, 20; Deut., xxxi, 29 | Ch. iv, 5. Psalm, xv, 5; cxii, 9; Prov., x, 
Chitin cte te ον Deut., vi, 5; xxxii,6| 2; xi, 4; xvi, 6; Dax. (LXX..), iv, 27 (24) 
ΟΡ ΟΣ GGEV 5 “SAK; ESP CDM 5) θυ νυν, σὸν πως Prov., xix, 18 
Chi it 2a, Kx 13-15" Deus: ; Vv, 7—19)| Chik 2: sice τ ςς ἢ Psalm, \xxx, 8, 14 
(Cav lees Sa aoOb ῊΣ 1} εν: XK 15 MOU RIV νι ciel Matachi,i, τι, 14 
( εἶν ΟΕ, ἜΚ χορ, KX τῇ GR ΧΥῚ; 5 acieies oe eee προ ee LECH, XIveaes 
[ΟΣ siete Deut., xviii, 10, 11 
APOCRYPHA. 
οτος clnjels oistels Tobit, iv, 13 | Ch. iv, 5. Zodzt, iv, 10; Sz#., iii, 30; iv, 31 
GTS TT ET ΡΣ IFAC MIA GAS 1s ON lersleele eetelerste Strach, iv, 4, 5 
NEW TESTAMENT. 

ROTA aa ΕΣ ΡΕΡῚ ote a's τ VALS ES aI || CLIX tai olermtersleeie sisieterccoeiete Matt., vii, 6 
Chine ACH AX, 20) XIX, Ὁ, 23" XXIL, Ae Ch. Xe Dai ΟΣ ΤΟ ae John, vi, 12 
XXiv, 14, 22| Ch. x, 2, 3../ohm, xii, 28; xvii, 6, 11,12, 26 
ΘῊς IS) ἐξ τ τ sid ow ate MGS, SRA STFS | Gl ἘΡ ΕΣ enicecieeieciee Matt., xxvi, 31 
(Cla WG RA SAA aire Whang Sih, nies o Gab eke) Chloe Oe Ars an Sid Somes aor Matt., xxi, 9 
GH NOL ke. Nai 27 ΞΘ τἀ itll 15} @lysKoi 27), ieie eye) πρὸ τίμιο obi 1 Com, ΣΟΙ, 55 
(Gib νυ ΠΣ ΔΎ ἡ τα Ὁ ΤΑ 1 Peter, ii, 11 | Ch. xi, 2-4, 6,7..-.. 7 7.22... vii, 15-20; x, 
Ch. i, 8.Matt., v, 39-48; 1 Cor., vi, 1-7 5-14; Luke, ix, 1-6; x, 4-16 
CIMT πον τ cio tis γος ΣΌΝ Nate ΝΟΥ ΠΕ πῖν τα". τ το ογδ πιεῖν Matt., xii, 31, 32 
GIFTS ΤΥ vc lavare were care ΟΣ, 1 7 Ὁ Γι, Ξὶ χιοῖνην 1 John, iv, 1; Rev., ii, 2 
GNI O ΞΕ τς ΕΘ ΟΝΝ τον τ απτ ΘΈΣΕΙ, 8. τὴ: 3 τ Ἐπ -ἰ 2 Cor., Xi, 13-15 
AGIVeMdU ET's cis vatotecteieleistevs ete 1 Dhess:, ν, 22 |\Ch; xit, 1). Watt: |x, 40, 24 δ Con 1 
CNS Oh Gone Bs ὙΠ Gal., v, 20| Ch. xii, 3. .JZatt., xiii, 55; Acts, xviii, 3; 
Gh: iti, '6.-:-(.).fokm, Vi, 433, 1 Cor., x, τὸ EX. G4° Sr Sess. Tie 
(της να lec epsine eversiots vayetanerate Maths. Ve Bi Ch Xi A aa stanton 2 Thess., iii, τὸ 
ΘΟῊΝ eon uke. Xi AL At AV 1S) || Che τ let versieiete teteiete tests Matt., x, 10 
RED SAN ΣΕ ἃ sisistoreiaie se sus one ace Fale OR Meee) ||) Chives shin siS ag opadneadoos ol Heb., X; 21 
MCP ELV ΠΟΥ ἢ 's'alolc ‘ave Κοῖνος Ὁ Ephesians, vi, 9 | Ch. xiv, 1...4Zatt., xxvi, 26; Kev., i, 10 
SV TOS elec as -. Ephesians, vi, 5-8 | Ch. xv, I.......++-1 Zim. ili, 2, 3, 8-10 
OER O sie cio crews atta: Saye! store RCV ss RR TEs ΟἾΣΘ ον cisicreislebcroe|-sl-toe Titus ii, 15 
MONO MV ATE Ole cise s stesorespie ese aie Matt., xi, 29 | Ch. xv, 3..4¢., v, 22; xviii, 15-17, 21-35 
ΟΠ, ἀυυ τος. Rom., xiv, 1-4; I 7im., | Ch. xv, 4...-Matt., v-vii; Luke, xi, xii 
iv, 3-5; Acts, xv, 29; xxi, 25;|Ch. xvi, 1.J7¢., xxiv, 42, 44; Lake, xii, 35 
ὙΠΟ ΜΙΝ αἵ ΚΑ, ἀῶ te ΤΟ 25. Clap. Web eb do ons ben ooou das Fleb., X, 25 
Rev., ii, 14, 20| Ch. xvi, 3......Matt., xxiv, 3-5, 11, 24; 
Chiwvil, 2 ρΎ ευκνος δος Ων, ΚΝ, EO ile 2 Tess. ore 
Ch. viii, 1..Aatt., vi, 16; John, xix, 14} Ch. xvi, 4......+.. oc se AM GUE RXIV, 13 
Ch. viii, 2, 3..J7¢., vi, 5-13; Lake, xi, 2-4 | Ch. xvi, 5..... ,-WMatt., xxiv, 26-28, 31; 
Ch. ix, 2..Matt., xxvi, 29; John, xv, 1, 5 I. Thess, 1V, 10,007 
Clings} Bien Baa on sodn- Matt:, XN, (345, 377" Chis Xvi, 6.206. Les hs svcistepele Matt., xxiv, 30 


MRI LE TEE: 


THE_GENUINENESS, PRIORITY, SOURCE AND 
VALUE, OF ΖΕ + TEACRING. 


By J. RENDEL Harris, M.A., 


Fellow of Clare College, University of Cambridge, England. Lecturer on 
N. T. Greek in Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md. 


N the following pages I shall endeavor to reproduce a few 
thoughts recently expressed upon this newly published 
patristic Tract in a series of lectures held in the Johns Hopkins 
University, in the belief that the book demanded a closer inves- 
tigation and a criticism somewhat less denominational than it 
seems thus far to have received. And, although I am far from 
believing that I can do either in the way of textual criticism or 
commentary all that so important a document deserves, I can 
at least open the way for the more extended treatment by pre- 
senting some results arrived at after a careful reading of this 
wonderfully interesting and epoch-making tract. 

Let us begin, then, with the manuscript itself from which 
the text of the 7eaching was taken. Our first surprise meets 
us here: the WS. ἐς not a new one, for it has been accessible to 
scholars certainly since 1875, the year in which Bishop Bryennios 
published from it the complete text of the so-called Epzstles of 
Clement. And the second surprise follows close upon the heels 
of the first :—the fact that the 7eaching of the Twelve Apostles 
was contained in the MS. which Bryennios discovered, was 
advertised by him in his edition of the Clementine Epistles, and 
no man gave heed to it. The book passed into the hands of 
most of the first scholars in patristic literature, some of whom 
not only read but actually copied and reprinted Bryennios’ 
description of his book and its contents, but apparently without 


22 PROF, J. RENDEL HARRIS. 


any suspicion of their proximity to the lost treasure. Bishop 
Lightfoot seems to have paid the minimum of attention to it, 
though he moralized in an unconsciously prophetic way that 
there was a hope of good things to come (which the discovery 
of the complete text of the Clementine Epistles had awakened 
and intensified). When he wrote this sentiment he had under 
his eyes, or not very far from them, a notice that certain pages 
of the MS. of Bryennios were occupied by a work called the 
Teaching of the Apostles to which frequent allusion is made in 
early patristic literature.’ 

Gebhardt and Harnack, in their beautiful edition of the 
Apostolic Fathers, reprinted the table of Contents almost as 
found in Bryennios’ edition (Prolegomena, pp. 8, 9, 12), and not 
a word have they to say (so far as I have yet been able to dis- 
cover) as to the meaning of the statement that the Zeaching of 
the Twelve Apostles stood in the MS. from the middle of fol. 76 
(recto) to the end of fol. 80. 

We may even go further and say that there is not very much 
reason to suppose that Bryennios himself had a clear idea of 
the value of the document which he registered ; for in the first 
place, there was no need to have spent eight years in the pro- 
duction of the edition which has just reached us from Con- 
stantinople (eight months would have been ample time); and 
in the second place, the good Bishop did not even offer to print 
it when he discovered it, which he would hardly have failed to 
do had he suspected its value. In fact, he expressly excepted this 
part of the book, when he remarked that his MS. contained a 
complete Greek text of Barnabas, and the Epistles of Lgnatius, 
both of which he intended to lay before the public. 

Nor is it much less surprising that several German scholars, 
who have been quite recently occupied in the restoration of the 
lost book from fragments preserved in other works, should have 
failed to divine the meaning of the unconscious advertisement 
of Bryennios. 


1 What Lightfoot actuaily says on the subject of the Teaching is confined to 
one sentence (St. Clement of Rome, Appendix, p. 231): ‘‘ From the list of con- 
tents given above (p. 224) it will have appeared that the interest of this MS. does 
not end with Clement. What may be the value of the Doctrina Duodecim Afos- 
tolorum remains to be seen; but a new authority for the Greek of Barnabas will 
be a great gain.” 


THE GENUINENESS, ELC., OF THE TEACHING. 23 


It seems necessary to make these remarks to begin with, as 
the most extravagant statements are afloat with regard to the 
critical ability and patristic learning of the editor of the book, 
which seem to me to savor more of adulation of those whom 
fortune favors than of sound judgment. Returning to our MS., 
we say, then, that it is the same from which the complete 
Epistles of Clement were published in 1875; it lies in the library 
of the Holy Sepulchre at Constantinople, and is numbered 458.’ 
The form of the MS. is a small octavo (19 centimetres high by 
15 broad), and it contains 120 pages of cursive writing of the 
eleventh century. These are distributed as follows: 

1. Synopsis of Holy Scripture, by S. John Chrysostom, fol. 


2. Epistle of Barnabas, fol. 33-51.* 

3. Ist Epistle of Clement to Corinthians, fol. 51*-70. 

4. 2nd Epistle of Clement to Corinthians, fol. 70-76. 

5. Leaching of the Twelve Apostles, fol. 76-80. 

6. Epistle of Mary of Cassobele to Ignatius, fol. 81-82. 

7. The so-called Zgnatian Epistles, beginning with the letter 
of Ignatius to Mary of Cassobelez, and followed by eleven other 
epistles, fol. 82-120. 

On the vecto of the 120th leaf is the subscription of the 
scribe who signs himself, “‘ Leon, copyist and sinner,” and gives 
the date of his completed work in Tuesday the 11th of 
June 1056 A.D. (the reckoning being made, after-the Greek 
manner, from the Creation of the World, and the number of the 
indiction being added). The blank space at the close of the 
120th leaf is then utilized by the scribe for a familiar patristic 
explanation of the divergent genealogies in Matthew and Luke. 
On the recto of the 76th leaf, between the 2nd Epzstle of Clement 
to the Corinthians and the Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, there 
is inserted a catalogue of the Hebrew names of the books of 
the Old Testament, which is interesting, frst, as containing a 


1 Whether the MS. was in the Library before the year 1875 I do not know. 
Lightfoot in his Appendix to the Zfis¢/es of Clement informs us that a Catalogue 
of the MSS. in the Library was made by Bethmann in 1845, with no reference to 
the volume in question; and that in 1856 M. Guiguiant made a report of its con- 
tents to the French Academy of Inscriptions, which is published in the Journal 
Général de l Instruction Publique 1856, xxv, p. 419. M. Guiguiant seems to have 
had a feeling of contempt for theological MSS. Again, in 1858 the Library was 
visited by Coxe, of the Bodleian, who equally omits to notice the volume. 


24. PROF, J]. RENDEL HARRIS. 


curious canonical order: second, on account of the peculiar 
transliterations of Hebrew words and names into Greek letters. 

We have, then, a MS. dated in the middle of the eleventh 
century, which contains, amongst other well-known writings, a 
Tract which agrees in name with a lost patristic document to 
which the early Christian Fathers make frequent allusion. Let 
us examine the process of identification between the book lost 
and the book found. 


ITS GENUINENESS. 


It responds to the tests. Throughout, this Tract is in har- 
mony with the conceptions and usages of the church in the ear- 
liest times. Both in spirit and form it is actually true to the 
life and simple faith of those who in the gospel immediately 
succeeded the apostles. Frequent coincidences exist, and new 
ones occur to our surprise the more we study the document, 
which are evidently undesigned. They appear in matters which 
no one would anticipate, and which a forger would never pitch 
upon. While the Zeaching presents so many water-marks of 
truth, we will stop to illustrate only by one or two. 

Chapter x exhibits the use of the exclamations “ Hosanna” 
and “ Maranatha” in the early church. I believe this is the only 
passage where we find the eucharistic usage of the Hosanna, 
except, of course, in documents which have immediately copied 
the Zeaching. Yet there are indications that such chiliastic 
forms of speech were in general use. When Hegesippus de- 
scribes the martyrdom of S. James the Just,-we find that S. 
James’ testimony is chiliastic, “‘ Why ask ye me concerning the 
Son of man? ... He cometh in the clouds of heaven;” and 
the conversion of the people who hear him is chiliastic, for the 
multitude was led away so as to expect Jesus (προσδοκᾶν 
‘Inoobv); and their shout of agreement with S. James’ speech 
to the Pharisees is also in the words “ Hosanna to the Son of 
David.” 

As to the “ Maranatha,” we have traces of that in the New 
Testament. And the Gospel of Nicodemus suggests to us that 
the Hosanna and Maranatha which must have become unpopu- 
lar as chiliasm declined were replaced by the Alleluia, for in 
chapter v we read that when the Lord descended into hell, 
“Father Adam cried with a loud voice exclaiming, Alleluia, 


THE GENUINENESS, E£TC., OF THE TEACHING. 25 


7 


which is interpreted ‘ The Lord cometh, assuredly ’!” and in chap- 
ter vi, “ All the saints . . . cried, saying, Alleluia, Blessed is he 
that cometh in the name of the Lord.” 

Thus, the interpretation of. early Christian watch-words sur- 
vived after the words themselves had been changed; which is 
very suggestive of an early date for any document employing 
those watch-words. 

Again, in chapter xii, we read, “For ye shall possess under- 
standing, right and left.” This curious use of the terms ‘ right 
and left’ is properly explained in the Apostolic Constitutions as 
follows: “For ye have understanding and are able to discern 
right and left, and to discriminate between teachers and false 
teachers,” (Book VII, 28). 

It appears that there was a common use of the terms ‘right 
and left’ in the early church to discriminate between persons, 
which may perhaps have been borrowed from chapter xxv of 
Matthew. Also, an interesting instance is found in the Visions 
of Hermas, where the church, in the form of an aged woman, 
invites him to sit beside her: Hermas proposes to sit on her 
right hand, and is promptly reproved, because the right hand is 
reserved for the sanctified,—or, in other words, Hermas is not 
a right-hand man. 

But the most curious example of this peculiar interpretation 
is found in the popular perversions of 77α{1., vi, 3, “ Let not thy 
left hand know what thy right hand doeth,” by the early Chris- 
tians. Thus, the author of the Opus Jmperfectum says that the 
“right hand” here means the Christian, and the ‘left hand” 
the unbeliever. 


“Dextra est populus Christianus qui est ad dextram Christi; sinistra 
autem, omnis populus, qui est ad sinistram. Hoc ergo dicit: ne Christi- 
anum facientem eleemosynam, qui est dextra, infidelis aspiciat, qui est 
Sinistra. Christianus autem si Christianum viderit eleemosynas facientem, 
non est contra Christi preeceptum quoniam ambo dextra sunt.” 


And this intrepretation must have been wide-spread since it is 
controverted by both Chrysostom and Augustine. The former 
declares that alms are not only to be kept secret from unbe- 
lievers but from believers also: 


Οὐχ oS τινές φασιν ὅτι TOUS Guatovs δὲι upUATELY ἀνθρώπους" πάν- 
τας γὰρ ἐνταῦθα λανθάνειν éxélevoev.—CuHRYS., Hom. in Matt., vi, 3. 


— 


26 PROF. J. RENDEL HARRIS. 


And Augustine not only disputes the opinion that unbelievers 
are denoted by the left hand, but also another opinion which he 
declares to be so absurd and ridiculous, which he would not 
have alluded to but for the fact that he found many people in 
bondage to the error, viz.: that by the left hand is denoted a 
man’s wife! (MIGNE, Patr. Lat., 34. 1272.) 

These passages illustrate the prevalent personal application 
of the terms right and left in the early church. A document 
presenting the term and employing it in its true intent, thereby 
unaffectedly betrays its antiquity. 


At this point, perhaps better than at any other, we may pause 
to consider another matter, that of Stichometry. In a cata- 
logue of Scriptures canonical and uncanonical which is attributed 
to Nicephorus, who was Patriarch of Constantinople between 
the years 806 and 814, we find one of the latest patristic refer- 
ences to the Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, in which catalogue 
it occupies a place among the apocryphal books of the New 
Testament, between the Gospel of Thomas and the Epistles of 
Clement; and is credited with containing 200 verses or sfzchz. 

Now it is noted by Bryennios that the MS. from which he 
prints his text contains 203 lines; and he therefore assumes that 
we have an almost perfect identification of the newly found Tract 
with the lost book described by Nicephorus. And in this argu- 
ment he has been very closely followed by American critics. 
While, however, I am not disposed to deny the identity of the 
published Zeaching with the lost work noted by Nicephorus, I 
am strongly persuaded that too much has been made of the 
agreement between the numbers. 

In order to justify the use which has been made of the co- 
incidence, we should be obliged to assume, a. An identity of 
arrangement of the matter in the book whose lines were num- 
bered by Nicephorus with that of the MS. copied by Leon more 
than two hundred years later; 6. An identity of these lines 
with the traditional stzchos, or verse-measure of the period; 
c. An exact numeration onthe part of Nicephorus instead of an 
approximate one. And with regard to these points the matter 
stands as follows: : 

In the first place, Bryennios assumes the substantial identity 
of form of Leon’s copy with the text of Nicephorus, if he does 


THE GENUINENESS, ETC., OF THE. TEACHING. 27 


not go further and imply their actual identity!’ and this suppo- 
sition is, to say the least, unconfirmed in any way. 

In the second place, we know that the verse-measure of anti- 
quity is an average hexameter, which may perhaps in the course 
of time suffer contraction at the hands of the scribes, but hardly 
expansion. Let us examine, then, the number of average hex- 
ameters which the book contains, and this can be easily done, 
as Bryennios has published his text in almost perfect hexameter 
lines. Or we may actually write the text ourselves in 16-syl- 
labled rhythms, and we shall find that this gives us 292 sézchi ; 
and Bryennios’ copy does not give a result very different from 
this. As soon, then, as we have arrived at this result the sup- 
posed identity breaks down, or, at least, cannot be unduly 
pressed. 

And thirdly, it is at least suspicious that the table of Nice- 
phorus only gives us the hundreds: supposing his record to be 
200, it is obvious that the count is either an approximate one or 
that the figures which should follow the 2 have dropped out. 

All that we can infer, then, is a substantial identity in com- 
pass between the book that is lost and the book that ws dis- 
covered. 

Those who wish to study the stichometric numbers of Nicepho- 
rus will find his table reprinted in WESTCOTT, Ox the Canon 
(5th edition, p. 560); but it must be noticed that Westcott gives 
erroneously, and upon slight manuscript authority, the number 
of verses in the Teaching as 6000." 


ITS PRIORITY. 


We shall now trace the Book back through the early centu- 
ries of the Christian Era, and note how our conception of its 
use and reception become definite as we reach the Second Cen- 
tury. This we may do in the following manner. 


1 Prolegomena to the Zeaching, p. 21. 

1 The whole subject is cloudy; and in reality no one knows what was the exact 
verse-measure applied by Nicephorus. The Bryennios MS. records 600 verses 
at the close of the 2%d Epistle of Clement, which Bryennios alters to 2600 in order 
to make agreement with the number given by Nicephorus for the two Clementine 
Epistles; but even then his own MS. only contains 1120 lines (853 to the first 
Epistle and 267 to the second). Why should we assume an identity of form be- 
tween the MSS. employed by Nicephorus and those copied by Leon in the case 
of the Zeaching, but not in the case of the Clementine Epistles ? 


24 


28 PROF. J. RENDEL HARRIS. 


The suspicions with regard to the lost book have been of two 
kinds: jirs¢, there has been a tradition, surviving amongst late 
patristic writers and copyists, that the book was in some way 
connected with the Agostolical Constitutions; and, second, there 
has been in the minds of modern critical students a strong per- 
suasion that the Afostolical Constitutions are modelled upon an 
earlier work which has disappeared. The tradition will be found 
quoted in USHER, Descriptis Ignatiz (p. 7), where he cites from 
Zonaras the remark that, “Some persons say that the Teaching 
of the Apostles is the same book as the Afostolical Constitutions 
written by Clement.” I have not been able to verify Usher’s 
reference ; but I find an exactly similar statement appended to the 
margin of the 39th Festal Letter of Athanasius in Codex Colber- 
tinus. And we may, therefore, conclude in favor of the diffusion 
of such atradition. Modern critics have worked in the opposite 
direction. And, in order to show that there existed an earlier 
and immensely simpler form of these so-called apostolical books, 
they have carefully compared the common matter which is found 
in them and in earlier writers, especially contrasting the Seventh 
Book of the Coustztutzonus with some chapters at the close of the 
Epistle of Barnabas, and the not-long-since published book which 
passes under the name Zhe Two Ways, or The Judgment of 
Peter, or as it is sometimes called The Epitome (of Traditions). 
By this method Bickell came to the conclusion that there was a 
book lying behind these various forms of a common tradition, 
which book they had all employed ; and, in quite recent days, 
Krawutzky has undertaken to restore the lost book conjecturally 
by means of the later writings ; and, if we may believe Harnack, 
with remarkable success. (77ibingen Quartalschr. for 1882, p. 359.) 

In order to see how curiously close an investigation may pass 
to a great discovery, I shall transcribe a remarkable passage from 
DE PRESSENSE, Life and Practice in the Early Church (p. 4), in 
which he alludes to the problem of the Apostolical Constitutions : 


“A careful study shows that these eight books form, in reality, three 
collections; the first composed of the first six books, the second of the 
seventh, and the ¢hzrd of the eighth, for all the three treat of the same 
subject. We have, besides, a fourth collection, namely, the Coptic edition 
of the Constitutions of the Church of Alexandria, discovered by a learned 
Englishman named Tattam. The other collections exist both in Coptic 


LHE GENUINENESS, ETC., OF THE TEACHING. 29 


and Greek text: the former is the more ancient. An attentive comparison 
of them has proved to us that the interpolations are all in favor of sacer- 
dotal and hierarchical ideas. We may refer further to the Constitutions 
of the Church of Abyssinia, which are of a later date, since this Church 
was only founded in the Fourth Century; and to the Constitutions of the 
Church of Antioch, in Syriac, not yet published. All these various collec- 
tions treat of the discipline of the catechumens, of the government of the 
Church and its worship, and contain directions for the religious life. This 
is an authority of the highest value. The date of the four principal col- 
lections of the AZostolzcal Constztutzons without the interpolations is anterior 
to the Council of Niczea, as is shown by the following passages :” 


And now mark how near he comes to a great discovery! He 
proceeds to quote the following authorities: 


“1, IRENZUS, Fragment of Pfaff. It is agreed to apply to the Con- 
stitutions what he says of the δευτέρας τῶν ἀποστόλων Siaraéecr. 

“2, EUSEBIUS, H. E,, iii. 25. τῶν ἀποστόλων ai λεγομέναι διδαχαί. 

“3, ATHANASIUS. Jn Ep. Festali,39. διδαχή καλουμένη τῶν ἀπο- 
6rolwr. 

“4. EPIPHANIUS, etc. etc.” 


The three principal references which De Pressensé gives to 
prove the Ante-Nicene origin of the Apostolical Constitutions, 
are, two of them expressly and the third (that of Irenzus) 
equally really, references to the Zeaching of the Apostles. The 
writer concludes by remarking very wisely: 


“The Reformation has shown too much disregard of them (the 
Constitutions) in its opposition to everything connected with tradition. 
If they cannot claim any value as apostolical authority, they are yet of 
considerable importance as an historical document, zf only care be taken to 
remove the overlying strata of tradition.” 


/ 


When these strata are removed, it is easy to see that what 
remains must be uncommonly like the A:dayn τῶν ἀποστόλων. 

In order to show more clearly to the English reader the 
process by which the material of the Zeaching was used up in 
the Constitutions, especially in the Seventh Book, and in other 
books which have been mentioned, or might have been, under 
this head, we will give in parallel columns, the first chapter of 
the Teaching, and the corresponding portions of the Second 
Century writers Barnabas and Hermas, the Zwo Ways, and the 
Seventh Book of the Constitutions. 


30 


TEACHING OF APOSTLES. 
Prof. Orris’ translation. 
Ch. i. 

There are Two Ways, 
one of Life and one of 
Death, and the difference 
between the Two Ways is 
great. 

The Way of Life, then, 
is this: 

First, Thou shalt love 
the God who made thee: 

Second, Thy neighbor 
as thyself; and all things 
whatsoever thou wouldst 
not have befall thee, do 
thou, too, not to another, 

And of these words the 
Teaching is this: 

The jirst commandment, 
Bless them that curse 
you, and pray for your 
enemies, and fast for 
them that persecute you ; 
for what thank have ye if 
ye love them that love 
you? do not the nations 
also the same? but love ye 
them that hate you, and 


EPISTLE OF BARNABAS. 
Ch. xviii, xix. 

There are Two Ways of 
doctrine and authority, the 
Way of Light and the Way 
of Darkness. And between 
these Two Ways there is 
a wide difference. For 
over the one are stationed 
light- bearing Angels of 
God, but over the other 
Angels of Satan. And 
God is the Lord from 
everlasting to everlast- 
ing, but Satan the prince 
of the time which now is 
of unrighteousness. This, 
then, is the Way of Light, 
if a man desire to walk 
in the way toward the 
appointed place and is 
zealousin his works. The 
Knowledge, then, that has 
been given us whereby we 
may walk therein is on 
this wise: Thou shalt 
love Him that made thee. 


ye shall not have an enemy. 

Abstain from fleshly and worldly lusts. 

If one give thee a blow on the right cheek, turn 
to him the other also, and thou shalt be perfect ; if 
any one press thee into service for one mile, go with 
him two; if one take away thy cloak, give him thy 
coat also; if one take from thee thine own, ask z¢ 
not back; for not even canst thou. 

Give to every one that asketh thee, and ask not 
back ; for to all the Father wills that there be given 


of his own free gifts. 


PROF. J. RENDEL HARRIS. 


SHEPHERD OF HERMAS. 
Mandata, vi and ii. 
Their powers are dou- 
ble and relate to the 
righteous and the un- 
righteous. Do thou there- 
fore believe the righteous, 


‘but the unrighteous be- 


lieve thou not. For that 
which is righteous hath a 


Straight Way, but that 
which is unrighteous a 
Crooked one. . . . And 


there are two Angels with 
every man, one of Right- 
eousness, and the other of 
Wickedness. 

Give freely to all that 
are in need, not question- 
ing to whom to give and 
to whom not to give. 
Give to all: For the 
Father wills that distribu- 
tion be made to all men 
out of his own bestow- 
ments. Those, then, who 
receive will render answer 
to God wherefore they re- 
ceived and for what; those 
who receive in their dis- 
tress shall not be judged, 
but those who receive un- 
der false pretence shall 
pay the penalty. He, 
therefore, who gives is 
guiltless. 


Blessed is he that giveth according to the commandment; for he is guiltless. 

Woe to him that receiveth; for if, indeed, one that hath need receiveth, he 
shall be guiltless; but he that hath not need, shall submit to trial with refer- 
ence to why he received and for what purpose, and having come into custody, 
shall be examined with reference to what he did, and shall not go forth thence 
until he have paid the last farthing. 

But concerning this, also, it hath been said; Let thine alms sweat in thy 
hands until thou know to whom to give. 


THE GENUINENESS, ETC., OF THE TEACHING. 21 


Two WAYS, OR JUDGMENT OF PETER. 


John said, There are Two Ways, 
one of Life, and one of Death; but 
there is a great difference between the 
Two Ways. The Way of Life, then, 
is this: 

First, Thou shalt love the God who 
made thee, with all thy heart, and shalt 
glorify Him that redeemed thee out of 
death, which is the First Command- 
ment. 

Second, Thou shalt love thy neigh- 
bor as thyself, which is the Second 
Commandment; on which commands 
hang all the law and the prophets. 

Matthew said, All things whatsoever 
thou wouldst not have befall thee, do 
not thou to another. And tell them 
the Teaching with regard to these 
things, brother Peter. 

Peter said, etc. etc. 


that do not thou to another. 
despitefully use you. 


APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTIONS. 


Book VII. 


As given in CLarK’s Axte-Nicene Fathers 
from Whiston’s translation. 


᾿ We also, following our teacher Christ, 
who is the Saviour of all men, espe- 
cially of those who believe, are obliged 
to say that there are Two Ways, the 
one of Life, the other of Death; which 
have no comparison one with another, 
for they are very different, or rather 
entirely separate; and the Way of Life 
is that of nature, but that of Death was 
afterwards introduced, it not being ac- 
cording to the mind of God, but from 
the snares of the adversary. 

The first Way, therefore, is that of 
Life; and is this which the Law also 
does appoint; To love the Lord God 
with all thy mind and with all thy soul, 
who is the one and only God, besides 
Whom there is no other; and thy neigh- 
bor as thyself. And whatsoever thou 
wouldst not should be done to thee. 


Bless them that curse you; pray for them that 
Love your enemies; for what thanks is it if ye love those 
that love you? for even the Gentiles do the same. 


But do ye love those that 


hate you, and ye shall have no enemy. For, says He, Thou shalt not hate any 
man, no, not an Egyptian, nor an Edomite; for they are all the workman- 
ship of God. Avoid not the persons, but the sentiments of the wicked. Abstain 
from fleshly and worldly lusts. If any one giveth thee a stroke on the right 
cheek, turn to him the other also. Not that revenge is evil, but that patience is 
more honorable. For David says, If I have made returns to them that repaid me 
evil. If any one compel thee to goa mile, go with him twain. And he that 
will sue thee at the law and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also. 
And from him that taketh thy goods, require them not again. Give to him that 
asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee shut not thou thy hand. 
For the righteous man is justified and lendeth. For the Father would have you 
give to all, who Himself maketh his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and 
sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. It is, therefore, reasonable to give 
to all out of thine own labors. For, says He, Honor the Lord out of thy 
righteous labors; but so that the Saints be preferred. 


A comparison between these parallel passages will show the 
relative simplicity of the text of the Teaching, and the complex- 
ity of the Constitutions, which have embedded the sentences of 
the Zeaching in a mass of commentary often feeble and contra- 


32 PROF. J. RENDEL HARRIS. 


dictory to the text (as in the inculcation of revenge). The 
other writers quoted show an advance on the TZeaching; for 
example, the Zwo Ways has the childish ecclesiastical device 
of breaking up the text into small portions, and putting one in 
the mouth of each of the Apostles; and the comparatively late 
character of the text of Barnabas is shown by the entire exci- 
sion of the communistic sentiments of the Zeaching. It certain- 
ly looks as if we had here found the earliest form of a common 
and important tradition. But before we draw this conclusion, 
especially with regard to the priority of the Teachings to Barna- 
bas’ and to Hermas which require a closer examination, we 
will go back to the point from which we started, viz., that both 
tradition and criticism suggest an earlier book closely connected 
with the voluminous Ajostolical Constitutions, and there is a 
good degree of probability that the newly published Tract is the 
very book. 

As we examine the references to this book which are found 
in the early Fathers of the Church, we shall find that they be- 
come more distinct as we ascend the scale of time; and this 
indicates that the book passed from a very general acceptance 
to asmaller degree of reception, for in the ordinary course of 
events, we expect references to multiply with writers. This 
point comes out very clearly in the reference which Athanasius 
makes to it in his 39th Festal Letter, where he says: 

“There are other books of an uncanonical character which are useful 
for the instruction of persons not yet initiated into the Christian faith, 


such as the Wisdom of Solomon, and Strach, Esther, Fudith, Tobit, The 
Teaching of the Apostles, and the Shepherd.” 


Now, here we have the Zeaching placed side by side with a 
work in many respects similar to itself which is going out of 
favor with the church. And the same intimation is made by 
Eusebius,’ who classes it amongst the spurious books with the 
so-called Shepherd, the Apocalypse of Peter, and the Epistle cir- 
culated under the name of Barnabas. We shall allude present- 
ly to the plural form under which Eusebius (followed by Anas- 

1It is interesting to notice that the Zvaching is frequently in early catalogues 
or notices thrown into close connection with Barnabas and Hermas ; or else with 


the Constitutions. 
2 de ee RN 


THE GENUINENESS, ETC., OF THE TEACHING. 33 


tasius the Sinaite, and Nicephorus Callistus) describes the 
book.’ When we come to earlier writers this uncertainty as 
to authenticity or canonicity disappears. For example, the 
anonymous writer whose works are bound up with Cyprian 
(PSEUDO-CYPRIANUS, De aleatorzbus),’ instructs us not to re- 
ceive a disobedient or disorderly brother until he repent, lest 
-our prayers should be hindered by him, and quotes his author- 
ity in the Teachings of the Apostles. Now, we cannot find the 
language of the writer very closely reproduced in the Teaching, 
but it seems to be a modification of injunctions in chapter xiv, 
and is certainly an older form than that of the Constitutions , 
the point, however, for us to notice is the unqualified and un- 
suspicious character of the quotation. 

When we come to the junction of the Second and Third 
Centuries, we are astonished to find one of the greatest of the 
Church Fathers citing the Zeaching with almost verbal exact- 
ness and as Scripture. The passage is as follows: 


“ Such a one is called a thief by the Scripture: it says in fact, My son, 
be not a liar; for lying leads to theft.” * 


And these words occur in chapter iii of our printed Tract. Now, 
a work which can be thus alluded to at such an early period must 
be of very great antiquity and almost universal reception.‘ 
Moreover there are other references of a less direct charac- 
ter made by Clement to the Zeaching. In the quotations which 
he professes to make from the Decalogue (Ped. @, iii, 12. 89) he 
inserts the words ov παιδοφθορήσειΞ; compare ch. ii, 2, of the 


! The so-called Zeachings of the Apostles. 

3.“ Et in doctrinis apostolorum.: si quis frater delinguit in ecclesia et non 
paret legt, hic nec colligatur, donec paenitentiam agat, et non recipiatur, ne ingui- 
netur et inpediatur oratio uestra.”—Opp. Omn. ex recen. G. Hartelii, 111, 96. 
Migne, Patr. Lat., IV, 906. 

3 CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA, Strom., I, xx, ad fin. ed. Potter, 377; ed. Din- 
dorf, II, 83. 

4 Dr. J. C. Long, in The National Baptist for April 24, has objected to the 
statement that Clement quotes the 7eaching as Scripture, on the ground that the 
real reference of Clement is to a passage which he frequently quotes and com- 
ments upon in the Gospel of John, ‘‘ the same is a thief and a robber;” and I am 
disposed to believe in the correctness of his argument; he then continues to ex- 
plain φησὶ y ovr in a general sense, as equivalent to ‘‘it is said”. This inter- 
pretation also seems to me to be perfectly lawful. But I think that it should be 


34 PROF. J]. RENDEL HARRIS. 


Teaching. And in a fragment of Clement preserved in the 
Catena of Nicetas on Matt., v, 42 (Clem. Alex. ed. Dindorf, iii, 
492) we have a striking parallel to the language of chapter i of 
the Zeaching: 

Ποιητέον ἐλεημοόυνας ἀλλὰ μετὰ upiGEew@s καὶ τοῖς ἀξιόις, iva εὕρω- 

μεν ἀνταπόδομα παρὰ τοῦ δψίότου - οὐαὶ δὲ τοῖς ἔχουσι καὶ ἐν ὑποπκρι- 
Ger λαμβάνουσιν, ἢ δυναμένους βοηθεῖν ἑαυτοῖς καὶ λαμβάνειν παρ᾽, 
ἑτέρων βουλομένοις: ὅ γὰρ ἔχων καὶ δι ὑπόκρισιν ἢ ἀργίαν λαμβάνων 
καταπριθήδετας. 
Besides this Clement makes distinct reference to the doctrine 
of the Zwo Ways, affirming it to be the teaching of the gospel, 
of the Afostles,and of the prophets; and he also quotes the 
analogous Greek story of the Judgment of Hercules in a man- 
ner which suggests that there had been a popular fusion of the 
Jewish and Greek ethics.’ 

When we come into the Second Century we are even more 
surprised, for we find good reason to believe that Irenzeus wrote 
a commentary upon this very book. The grounds upon which 
we make this statement are as follows: 

Eusebius notes that Irenzus dedicated to Marcianus a trea- 
tise on the Afostolical Preaching ;* and in this he is followed or 
confirmed by Jerome,’ who says that Irenzeus wrote ashort book 
against the Gentiles and something besides on the subject of 
Teaching. Upon this Harvey remarks, “ The term ‘ Apostoli- 
cal Preaching’ was frequently applied to the early symbol of 
Faith. Such a relic would have been of rare value if it had de- 
scended to us.” And he suggests that two of the fragments 
published by Feuardent, and the second and fourth of Pfaff, 
may have been taken from this work. 


noted on the other hand, a. that the term γραφῇ might very well apply to both 
quotations; and ὁ. that an exactly similar instance is foundin Strom., ii, 9, p. 452, 
where Clement is quoting Hermas; 

Ὁ ποιμὴν δὲ ἁπλῶς ἐπὶ τῶν κεκοιμημένων θεὶς τὴν λέξιν δικαίους οἵἷδὲ 
τινας ἐν ἔθνεσι καὶ ἐν Ἰουδαίοις οὐ μόνον πρὸ τῆς τοῦ Κυρίου παρου- 
δίας ἀλλὰ καὶ πρὸ νόμου κατὰ τὴν πρὸς θεὸν εὐαρέστησιν, ὡς Ἄβελ, ὡς 
Νῶε, ὡς εἰ τις ἕτερος δίκαιος: φησὶ γοῦν τοὺς ἀποστόλους καὶ διδασκά- 
λους, #.7.A. 

1 Strom., v, 31, ed. Dind., iii, 25; et cf. Pad., ii, x, IIo. 

9" ἐς Kai ἄλλος ὅν ἀνατέθεικεν ἀδελφῷ Mapxiave τοὔνομα, εἰς ἐπί: 
δειξιν τοῦ ἀποστολικοῦ unpvymaros.”—Hist. Eccl., V, xxvi. 

3 Contra Gentiles volumen breve, et De discipline aliud.—Cat. Scr. 


THE GENUINENESS, ETC., OF THE TEACHING. 35 


A reference to the 36th Greek Fragment of Irenzus as pub- 
lished by Harvey (the 2nd of Pfaff) will show that Irenzus was 
commenting upon the 4:day7; for he says that ‘“ Those who 
have followed the Second Book of the Afostolical Constitutions 
know that the Lord has established a new offering in the New 
Covenant, according to the word of Malachi the prophet, 


‘Wherefore from the rising of the sun to its setting, 

My name shall be great among the nations; 

And in every place, incense shall be offered to my name, 
And a pure offering.’”’—ch. i, 11. 


Upon which Harvey remarks with an unconscious acuteness that 
a similar application of this same text of Scripture is made in 
Ap. Const., vii 30. Now, the Afostolical Constitutions are 
simply working up chapter xiv of our Tract. We infer, then, 
with great probability, that Irenzeus at the close of the Second 
Century wrote a commentary upon the TZeaching, which com- 
mentary must have been a sort of first edition of the Afostolical 
Constitutions. Vhe antiquity which thus is attributed to the 
Teaching must be great. We notice in passing that the lan- 
cuage of Ireneus shows that the book was originally cast in 
two parts: this may explain why Eusebius and others use the 
plural Zeachings ; and we shall perhaps be able to infer that the 
first six chapters are a separate tract to which exclusively be- 
longs the alternative title Zeaching of the Lord, through the 
Twelve Apostles, to the Gentiles. 

And now we come to an important question: having noted 
the similarity of the early chapters of the Teaching (what we 
may call Book I) to certain chapters of the Epzstle of Barnabas 
(chapters xviii to xx), we have to determine more carefully 
whether Barnabas quotes the Zeaching, or the Teaching quotes 
Barnabas. And with this there is a collateral question to be 
settled: May not the chapters be a late insertion in the text of 
Barnabas, and not a part of the genuine early document at 
all ? 

This is easily settled by remarking that the coincidences be- 
tween Larnabas and the Teaching are not confined to the chap- 
ters mentioned, but may be traced in other parts of the book. 
A single instance will suffice: In Barnabas iv, 9, we have: 


36 PROF. J. RENDEL HARRIS. 


“ Wherefore let us take heed in the last days: for the whole time of 
our life and faith will not profit us one whit, unless now in the lawless 
time and in the coming offences, we resist as becomes the sons of God.” 


Now, the very same sentiment is found in chapter xvi of the 
Teaching. This settles the question of interpolation. In the 
next place, Barnabas is quoting a written book; for, when he 
has concluded the ethical maxims which coincide so closely 
with the Teaching, he observes (ch. xxi) that it is a good 
thing, having learned the ordinances of the Lord, as many as 
have been written, to walk therein. And this written bookis our 
Teaching of the Apostles, since it is said at the beginning of 
chapter xviii, ‘‘ And now let us pass on to another piece of 
Knowledge (yv@ozs)' and Teaching (61d ayn).” | 

On every ground, therefore, we are justified in conclud- 
ing that the book which Clement quotes, and upon which 
Irenzus wrote a commentary, is also the book employed by 
Barnabas. 

Our next step relates to Hermas, and is a similar question, 
and admits of the following brief remarks. It is undeni- 
able that the Wandata of Hermas, especially the Second Com- 
mand, exhibit coincidence of language with the Zeaching. And 
I believe it will be admitted by very many that the First Com- 
mand of Hermas shows a similar coincidence with a passage 
preserved by Clemens Alexandrinus from the lost book known 
as the Preaching of Peter. Now, it is obviously far more likely 
that Hermas in writing his Commands should have plundered 
successively two commonly received books of his own day, than 
that two separate writers coming after him should have agreed to 
copy Hermas in two consecutive passages, one taking the First 
Command for his model, and the other the Second. There is, 
therefore, good reason to suppose that the 7eaching of the Apos- 
tles is older than the Shepherd of Hermas. 

Only one step further seems practicable, as we mentally com- 
pare the new book with authentic Second Century documents. 
Let us read it side by side with the two Apologies of Justin Mar- 


1 It is to be remarked that the term yv@0zS which Barnabas applies to the doc- 
trine of the Two Ways, is used in a suggestive way in chapter xi of the 7zaching- 
εἰς δὲ τὸ προσθεῖναι δικαιοσύνην Hai γνωσιν Κυρίου, δέξασθε αὐτὸν ὡς 
Κίριον. 


THE GENUINENESS, ETC., OF THE TEACHING. 37 


tyr, the longer of which has its date much in dispute, while the 
shorter and later one is accounted to have been written in 169 
A.D. And I think that two things at least will present them- 
selves strikingly to the reader; the first of which is that Justin’s 
First Apology, omitting the prophetical statements and theories 
which more evidently belong to his own mind, follows the pre- 
cise order of statement of Christian faith which occurs in the 
Teaching. it isa treatise on practical Christian ethics, drawn 
chiefly from the Sermon on the Mount, and after Justin has en- 
larged and commented upon the character of professing Chris- 
tians, their simplicity, harmlessness, and purity, and upon the 
way in which they constitute, with their Master, a fulfilment of 
ancient prophecy, he makes a complete break in his subject, and 
passes on, after the manner of the Zeachzng, to discuss the char- 
acter of Christian Baptismal Initiation and of the prayers and 
Thank-meal. And here his descriptions are singularly like 
those of the Zeaching, as, for instance, when he alludes to the 
custom of fasting before baptism with the person to be baptized, 
etc. The apparent coincidence between the structure of the 
Furst Apology of Justin and the line of thought of the Teaching 
is confirmed by a second very striking feature; for upon turning 
to the Second Apology, in which from its very brevity we might 
expect few similarities of thought and expression, we are inter- 
ested to find Justin retailing the story which Xenophon gives in 
the Memorabilia of the Judgment of Hercules, who meets Vir- 
tue and Vice in the form of two women at the cross-roads. Now 
this story is the exact Greek analogue of the doctrine of the 
Two Ways with which the Teaching begins, as we may see 
among other things, by the alternative name which is given to 
one of the earliest adaptations of our work, viz., the Two Ways, 
or the Judgment of Peter. 

And, without going into a detailed dispute as to whether the 
doctrine of the Two Ways is ultimately Greek or Hebrew in 
origin, I think we ought to recognize a striking resemblance be- 
tween the structure and materials of the Apologies of Justin and 
the Teaching of the Apostles. 

When we have thus made our argument accumulate force by 
successive reference to the early Fathers of the Third and Second 
Centuries, we have done enough to show that either we have a 


38 PROF. J. RENDEL HARRIS. 


document approximately original and of the early part of the 
Second Century, if not of the end of the First, or we have one 
of the most subtle frauds ever perpetrated upon the world 
scholarly and upon the world unscholarly. That this last sup- 
position is untenable will be evident not only from the fact that 
no suspicion exists with regard to the character of the MS., nor 
any reason for its publication in the interest of hierarchy with 
which forgery is a favorite science both in ancient and compara- 
tively modern days; but also from the frequent water-marks of 
antiquity which run in an unconscious manner across the text 
and are too subtle to have been the work of deliberate invention. 
We have now made rapid comparison between the 7eaching 
and authentic documents of the Second and following Centuries, 
and with the following result: the analysis of remarkable paral- 
lelisms in language and arrangement between the documents in 
question leads to a probable conclusion as to the priority of the 
Teaching to the main body of Second Century literature. 


ITS PLACE OF ORIGIN. 


We shall now attempt to determine the quarter from which 
the Zeaching originally emanated. 

And here the jivs¢ thing to be noted is the multiplicity of evi- 
dence that the book belongs to the Jewish wing of the church 
rather than to communities which are Pauline in origin or Alex- 
andrian in philosophy. Every page shows some curious form of 
Jewish thought, or brings out the contrast between the churches 
and the synagogues from which they were separating; nor, is the 
subscription at the head of the book adverse to this, since the 
Teaching of the Twelve Apostles to the Nations is evidently the 
teaching of persons trained in Jewish schools (whether apostles 
or not), and who betray their nationality in such quotations as, 
‘Do not even the Gentiles the same.’ (ch. i.) 

The very words with which the Zeaching opens may be closely 
imitated from early Rabbinical traditions, though at first sight 
they have the air of being the platitudes of Greek morality. 
Let us, for instance, take the Talmud: 


“There are Two Ways before me, one leading into Paradise, the other 
into Gehenna. When Jochanan the son of Zachai was sick unto death, his 
disciples came to visit him; and when he saw them he wept... . ‘I am 


THE GENUINENESS, ETC., OF THE TEACHING. 39 


about,’ said he, ‘to enter the presence of the King of kings . . . in whose 
_ presence there are Two Ways before me, one leading into Paradise, and 
the other into Gehenna, and should I not weep?’ Then they prayed him 
and said, ‘ Rabbi, give us thy farewell blessing.’ And he said unto them, 
‘Oh! that the fear of God may be as much upon you asthe fear of man.’”’ 
Berachoth, fol. xxviii, col. 2. 


It appears, therefore, that the doctrine of the Two Ways can lay 
claim to a Jewish origin, as readily as to a Greek one. 

The doctrine of fasting which appears in the 7eaching has 
also an origin distinctly Jewish, as well as that in some respects 
it antagonizes the Jewish fasts in a manner that would have been 
impossible for purely Gentile communities, who never could 
have occupied that middle position which at once conserves and 
condemns a religious custom. For instance, the first chapter di- 
rects the Christians to pray for their enemies and to fast for 
those that persecute them; and a reference to the Afostolical 
Constitutions and to the traditions preserved by Epiphanius’ will 
show that the persecutors to whom allusion is made are the Or- 
thodox Jews; and the same conclusion which obtains here will 
hold with regard to the hypocrites mentioned in chapter viii, ἢ 
whom it is not lawful to imitate in regard to the days of fasting ; 
this distinct allusion tothe Jews in the bi-weekly and annual 
Christian fasts is evident, we think, from the language of Epi- 
phanius, who directs Christians ‘to fast and mourn over them (the 
Jews) because on the day of the feast they crucified the Christ ;’ 
while the same antagonism which led to the change of days of 
the weekly fasting is as clear from the Constitutions, which di- 
rect as follows: 


“He therefore himself charged us to fast these six days on account of 
the impiety and transgression of the Fews, commanded us withal to dewazl 
over them and lament for their perdition; for even He himself wept over 
them because they knew not the time of their visitation. But He com- 
manded us to fast on the Fourth and Sixth Days of the week; the former 
on account of his being betrayed, and the latter on account of his passion.? 
... Ye ought therefore to dewazl over them, because when the Lord came 


1 Her., 0; 11. 

*« But let not your fastings be with the hypocrites; for they fast on the 
Second Day of the week and on the Fifth; but do ye fast ¢4e Fourth and 
Preparation.” 


40 PROF. J. RENDEL HARRIS. 


they did not believe on Him, but rejected his doctrine, judging themselves 
unworthy of salvation... .”? 


It appears, then, that the early Judeo-Christians made a 
point of retaining their weekly fasts, while they antagonized the 
Orthodox Jew by a change of days. 

Another Jewish feature will be recognized in the merit at- 
tributed to the distribution of alms, and the manner in which 
the deeds of charity appear to the credit of the person who does 
them in the books of heaven. Now this communism, indeed, 
is the universal doctrine of all early Christian churches, for as 
St. Justin says, “ We share with every man that is in need ;” 
but communism, or charity of any kind as a factor in one’s per- 
sonal salvation, is a doctrine unknown in Pauline Christianity. 
Yet the Zeaching informs us that by our hands we may give a 
ransom for our sins; and in so teaching it only follows the ear- 
lier Jewish teachings as found in Zodz¢, ‘ Alms do deliver from 
death’ (ch. iv, 10); or in Szvach, ‘ Water will quench the flam- 
ing fire and alms will atone for sins’ (ch. iii, 30) ; and the same 
sentiment is reflected in the Za/mud, which tells us that “ Four 
things cancel the decrees of Heaven—a/ms, prayer, change of 
name, and reformation of conduct” (Rosh Hashanah, fol. xvi, 
col. 2). The very same sentiment is repeated in the Second 
Epistle of Clement (ch. xvi), “ Almsgiving lifteth off the burden 
of sin.” 

In precisely the same way as the weekly fasting of the Or- 
thodox Jew was antagonized, the triple diurnal prayer is changed, 
and its place is taken by the repeated Lord’s Prayer; and the 
sentences of the Jewish prayers which refer to the gathering in 
of the Dispersion from the four winds are converted into a 
Christian aspiration for the perfection and completion of the 
church. 

Many other points might be brought forward to show the 
Jewish elements which prevail in the Teaching, such as the use 
of the Sapiential Books (our writer not only employ squotations 
from the Soz of Sirach but actually imitates in his catechetical 


11 ἰ5 interesting to notice how the fasts which in the Zeaching claim apos- 
tolic or semi-apostolic authority are in the Constitutions referred to the Lord 
himself. 


THE GENUINENESS, ETC., OF THE TEACHING. 41 


instruction, the τέκνον μοῦ with which the precepts of Szrach are 
frequently introduced); the symbolism of the rejuvenescent 
Vine of the house of David (to which the Pauline teaching seems 
to present no clear parallels); and the inheritance of the Holy 
Name (which is represented as now enshrined in Christian 
hearts). All these and other points that might be noticed lead to 
the conclusion that the book emanates from some church belong- 
ing to what the German critics would call the ‘ Peter-party ;’ 
but which I prefer to indicate under the term ‘Jewish-wing’ 
of Christianity. 

And now we will take another step in determining the locality 
from which the Tract originally came. Let us examine the 
Lord’s Prayer as given in the Teaching. One of the first things 
that strike us is the existence of a doxology, shorter, indeed, 
than the current one, inasmuch as it omits ‘The Kingdom;’ 
but the more likely to be genuine inasmuch as it is not acom- 
modated to later usage and received texts of the gospel. And the 
reader of the Teaching is likely to infer that the Revisers made 
a mistake in omitting the doxology from the Lord’s Prayer, 
since we have here an authority of the Second Century in its 
favor. Now, I am not concerned to defend the Revisers of the 
New Testament, but I think this is just one of the cases in 
which second thoughts will show that the Teaching confirms 
their text. For, what is the argument (over and above the 
evidence of MSS.) by which the rejection of the doxology is 
upheld? It is mainly this, that the doxology of the Lord’s 
Prayer is strongly suspected to have arisen out of liturgical 
usage; and when we turn from the version of the Lord’s Prayer 
to the language of the Thank-meal as given in the Zeaching, 
we find two forms of the doxology, one of which occurs twice 
in the words “ Thine be the glory for ever,’ while the other is 
the very form appended to the Lord’s Prayer, “ Thine be the 
power and the glory for ever.” Our document therefore con- 
firms us in the belief that the doxology came into the Lord’s 
Prayer from an embryonic liturgy. 

But it does more than this, 22 helps us to its own origin by the 
existence of the doxology and the peculiar form which it takes. 
For this form can be demonstrated to have been current in 
countries bordering on the north-east angle of the Mediterranean 


42 PROF. J. RENDEL HARRIS. 


Sea; while the more complete form in which it occurs in the 
New Testament has been shrewdly suspected by critics to have 
had its origin in the Syrian churches. And since St. Gregory 
of Nyssa is found to employ the doxology in the very form in 
which it occurs in the Zeaching, and apparently as something 
distinct from the Lord’s Prayer itself, and no one else, as far as 
I know, except this Cappadocian Father can be put in evi- 
dence for this form, we cannot be far from the truth in 
saying that the Teaching of the Apostles emanated from North- 
ern Syria. 

The whole matter will become clearer by a reference to Dr. 
Hort’s luminous note on the disputed doxology (the italics in 
the passage being, of course, my own): 


“There can be little doubt that the Doxology originated zx /éturgical 
use in Syria. ... The doxology can be traced in other liturgies believed 
on other grounds to be derived from that ascribed to St. James, or to have 
come under Constantinopolitan (Antiochian) influence, but apparently zn 
these alone ; and the language of Cyril of Jerusalem (Cazech., xxiii, 18) leaves 
no doubt that in his time (349 A.D.) it was absent from the liturgy of Feru- 
salem. ... It may possibly be owing to a remznzscence of liturgical use of 
the Syrian or some other doxology that the elaborate ascription with which 
Gregory of Nyssa concludes his last oration on the Lord’s Prayer contains 
ἡ δύναμις καὶ ἡ δόξα... . though he certainly treats no such words as 
part of the Lord’s Prayer itself.” —otes on Select Readings, p. 9. 


We conclude, therefore, in favor of a locality not far from 
the north-east corner of the Mediterranean, perhaps Antioch it- 
self or some more northerly church; and confirmations of this 
statement will readily present themselves to the reader.’ 

* All that has been said on these two points, the date of the 
Tract, and its place of production, will be found confirmed to the 


le.g., the curious word in ch. xii, χριότέμπορος, occurs three times in 
Gregory of Nazianzus, and, as far as I know, nowhere else. The compound 
χριδστεμπορεία according to Sophocles, occurs in Alexander of Alexandria and 
in Theodoret. 

Consider further that the Zeaching involves the assumption that the persons 
to whom it is addressed know the terms of the Jerusalem Concordat which are 
given in Acts. Now the Zeaching expressly relaxes this rule; ‘‘ Concerning 
meat, what thou art able bear; but of that offered to idols, beware exceedingly; 
for it is a worship of dead gods.” Now, a rule can only be relaxed to people who 
have the rule; and therefore the Zeaching must have followed on the track of 


THE GENUINENESS, ETC., OF THE TEACHING. 43 


full by a study of the Books of the New Testament employed 
by the writer. Let us ask ourselves the question, supposing a 
Judeo-Christian writer in Northern Syria at the beginning of the 
Second Century to produce a tract on Church-belief and Church- 
government, what Books of the New Testament will he be likely 
to quote? The answer would be as follows: He will above all 
other documents quote the Gospel of Matthew, or whatever 
similar Gospel may be in circulation amongst Jewish Christians; 
he will zo¢ quote the Gospel of Mark, whose place of publication 
is Rome, and which circulates in the opposite direction geogra- 
phically to Gospels written and published in Syria or Judea; he 
will very likely quote the Gospel of Luke, since the whole body 
of tradition affirms that Luke was a physician in the city of 
Antioch, and is correct in so affirming. Our opinion as to 
whether he will quote the Gospel of /o/xz will depend upon the 
place and time to which we refer the publication of that Gospel; 
but of this we may speak with great probability of correctness, 
he will quote the Apocalypse rather than the Gospel, since it is 
the earlier book by far, and is evidently written from a Judeo- 
Christian stand-point. If the writer should quote Lue, it is hot 
improbable that he will quote the Acts of the Apostles which 
belong to the same author, though perhaps some years later in 
date, and published first in the West. When we turn to the 
Epistles, we can hardly say more than this, that the likeliest 
letter to be quoted is the First of Peter, inasmuch as it is ad- 
dressed to the dispersed Jewish Christians in every part of Asia 
Minor, and therefore went before the world as an edition of a 
book would go, rather than as an epistle to a separate church. 
This early diffusion of 1 Peter is the key to its almost universal 
quotation by early Fathers. 

If our writer quote St. Paul, we can only infer that he will 
quote the earlier Epistles rather than the later ones; and 
perhaps we ought to say, epistles to churches in Asia rather 


the Concordat of Jerusalem, or have been circulated amongst churches where 
that Concordat was accepted. This again suggests Syria, Antioch, and Asia 
Minor. No Pauline Christian, certainly not Paul himself, would have expressed 
himself thus; for Paul held an idol to be nothing, while the worship of an idol 
was the worship of living demons rather than of dead gods. The Second Epistle 
of Clement enforces this sentiment as to the gods. See ch. iii. 

25 


44 PROF. J. RENDEL HARRIS. 


than those to churches in Greece: he certainly will not quote the 
Epistle to the Romans. 

Not to inquire further, let us now turn to the Zeaching and 
we shall see how closely these conditions are fulfilled. Bryennios 
gives a table of citations, which, if not complete in some points, 
is quite as full as it ought to be in others, and which will serve 
very well to make comparison with our ἃ 27107γ1 method. We 
find twenty citations, according to Bryennios, from the Gospel 
of Matthew, and six from the Gospel] of Luke (which may not all 
be genuine quotations, though some of them are certainly so). 
One quotation follows from the Acts; and one from the 
Revelation (this is not noted by Bryennios, but the expression 
in ch. v, 6, ἀγαπῶντες φψεῦδοσ, is so singularly like the φιλῶν καὶ 
ποιῶν ψεῦδος of Rev., xxii, 15 that I think it should be admitted); 
and we have further a quotation from 1 Peter. We come now 
to the Pauline Epistles, where Bryennios suggests references to 
Liphes., vi, 5, 9 and 1 Thess., v, 22. The last reference may 
perhaps be questioned. But there are two other not very 
remote parallelismsin 1 7hess., iv, 16 and 2 Thess., iii, 10, which 
might perhaps be admitted. The third chapter (2) contains in the 
words μηδὲ δηλωτὴς μηδὲ épiotinos μηδὲ Ovyunos a row of 
terms very similar to Gal. v, 20, ἔρις, δῆλος, θυμός. But we 
are always in danger of pressing coincidence and of overrating 
quotations; and I should be quite satisfied to conclude generally 
that the writer quotes those Books of the New Testament which 
would ἃ priorz have been expected from a Syrian Christian at 
the beginning of the Second Century. And with this remark 
we conclude our brief inquiry as to date and origin. 


ITs BEARING ON THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE. 


As soon as we have established the foregoing points we 
awake to the consciousness that we have been traversing the 
length and breadth of a field of battle; for when we conclude 
the authenticity or approximate authenticity of any writer 
quoting Scripture at a period near to that which was suggested 
above, we have involved ourselves in the great dispute as to the 
dates and authorship of the accepted Christian Gospels. There 
is nothing more interesting in the whole range of questions 
started by this book of Bryennios than the bearing of the 


THE GENUINENESS, ETC., OF THE TEACHING. 45 


discovery on the received Canon of Scripture; all that may be 
said about the immersion, quasi-immersion, or sprinkling and 
pouring, of the initiatory rite of Christian believers, the Sacrificial 
or non-Sacrificial character of the Eucharist or Thank-meal, the 
names and characters of the church-officials, is of slight moment 
compared with the question of the authenticity of the Scriptures ; 
if they are a fraud, @ fortiori the church is one also. Strange 
to say, this question has, as yet, hardly been noticed in connection 
with the new Tract, whether for the reason that the majority of 
Christian readers do not realize the force or impetuosity of the 
attack upon the Gospels, or because there is a general preference 
to the occupation of whitewashing sepulchres and tithing of 
herbs above that of building a city or defending one that has 
already been builded. 

In determining the questions of the time of publication and 
rate of diffusion of the Gospel of Matthew, for example, the 
conflict raged hotly round the Efzstle of Barnabas and certain 
other Second Century documents; and we shall do ourselves 
good by tracing the tortuous methods by which intelligent 
critics attempted to invalidate the canonicity of the Gospels. 

We begin, then, by recalling the fact that the so-called 
- Epistle of Barnabas (which has been assigned to various dates, 
ranging from the latter part of the First Century onwards) has 
been long credited with a distinct quotation from the Gospel of 
Matthew. In chapter iv of Barnabas the Latin Version (for the 
Greek text of Barnabas was, until quite recently, lost as far as 
the first chapters were concerned) contained the following 
" sentence : 


“Let us take care that we be not of those of whom it is written—that 
many were called but few chosen.” 


Naturally, the conclusion was drawn that we had here a 
scriptural quotation; nor was it difficult to determine the origin 
of the quotation, since the passage is found in Matthew’s 
Gospel. The authority and antiquity thus given to the book 
quoted was assailed in the following manner. It was maintained 
that the passage was not a quotation from Jatthew, and the 
words “it is written’”’ were said to have been introduced by the 
translator who made the Latin Version. Thus Credner in 1832 said: 


46 PROF. J. RENDEL HARRIS. 


“This disputed expression does not exist for us in the original Greek. 
It would have been easy for the translator to introduce the usual formula, 
and for internal reasons we shall hold the genuineness of the phrase 
to be unproved until the contrary is proved.”—Quoted by TISCHENDORF, 
When were our Gospels Written? (The Religious Tract Society’s ed., p. 90.) 


This was certainly an easy method of settling the dispute as to 
whether Barnabas quoted Matthew or not: and it is easy to see 
how widely such a method might be applied. It almost seems 
to mean, ‘For internal reasons I refuse to be convinced.’ 
Before Credner committed himself on that point he ought 
to have satisfied himself that there was no complete Greek text 
of Larnabas in existence; and especially he should have 
negotiated with the monks of Mount Sinai to encourage them 
in the work which they had begun, the destruction of their 
Fourth Century Bible, the celebrated Codex Sinaiticus. But let 
us hear what Tischendorf has to say on this point, for it was one 
in which he had, as the discoverer of the Codex, a peculiar 
interest. 


‘Not long after those words of Credner were written the original Greek 
text was discovered. While men were disputing in learned Germany as to 
whether the Latin Version was to be relied upon in this question or not, 
the original Greek text which was to decide the question lay hid in a 
Greek Convent in the deserts of Arabia, among a heap of old parchments. 
While so much has been lost in the course of centuries, by the tooth of 
time and the carelessness of ignorant monks, an invisible Eye had 
watched over this treasure, and when it was on the point of perishing in 
the fire, the Lord had decreed its deliverance. In the Sinaitic Bible, the 
entire text of this epistle of δαγαῦἦας has been found in the original Greek. 
And how does this original text decide this important question? It de- 
cides that this expression ‘It is written’ was first prefixed to this quotation 
from St. Matthew, not by the Latin translator, but by the author himself 
in the Greek original.” 


If further evidence had been wanting, it would have been 
found in the MS. from which Bryennios took the text of the 
Teaching, which contains a complete Greek text of Barnabas, 
and confirms the reading of the Sinaitic Codex in the passage 
in question. And now, what is the destructive critic to do with 
the question at issue? Obviously he must change front and 
maintain that there is, indeed, a quotation in the text of Bar- 
nabas, but it is taken from some other writer. He is so cer- 


THE GENUINENESS, ETC., OF THE TEACHING. 47 


tainly sure that the Gospels could not have been received or 
quoted at the time when Sarnadas was written, that he must 
find the quotation elsewhere. The principle is a simple one: 


“ΝΟ birds were flying overhead: 
There were no birds to fly.” 


And no Gospels could have been quoted, for there were no 
Gospels to quote. 

The best exponent of this new alternative is the anonymous 
author of the work entitled Supernatural Religion. 1 do not 
know how many editions this work has run through (the copy by 
me is the sixth edition), but I knowthat amore skilled advocate 
has never come into the lists upon the questions in debate, and 
that the multiplicity of editions is the best test of the influence 
which he has had upon the public mind. Let us see how he 
approaches the question of the quotations made by Barnabas. 
He begins by depreciating the date of Barnabas (which I agree 
with him has been set too high), suggests interpolation and cor- 
ruption of text, and, after a good deal of preliminary fenc- 
ing, and an admission that the old ground of objection was no 
longer tenable, he settles down to prove that the words “as it 
is written” are after all only an expression of individual opinion, 
and are often applied to uncanonical books (as, for instance, to 
Barnabas itself), and that the quotation is not from Matthew 
at all but from the Fourth Book of Ezra. But we must let him 
speak for himself: 


“Orelli, afterwards followed by many others, suggested that the quota- 
tion was probably intended for one in 4 £zra, viii, 3. Mudlt¢ quidem creat 
sunt, pauct autem salvabuntur,— For many are created but few shall be 
saved.’ Bretschneider proposed as an emendation for the passage in Ezra 
the substitution of vocazz for creatz; but, however plausible, his argument 
did not meet with much favor. Along with this passage was also sug- 
gested a similar expression in 4 Ezra, ix, 15: Quontam, plures sunt guid pe- 
reunt, quant guz salvabuntur,—‘ There are more who perish than who shall 
be saved.’ The Greek of the three passages may read as follows: 


Matthew, xxii, 14, πολλοὶ yap εἶσιν uAnrot, ὀλίγοι δὲ ἐηλερετοὶ. 
Ep. Barn., iv, πολλοὶ κλπτοί, ὀλίψοι δὲ éxAenro?. 
4 Ezra, viii, 3, πολλοὶ γὰρ ἐγεννήθησαν, ὀλίγοι δὲ δωθήδονται. 


There can be no doubt that the sense of the reading in 4 Ezra is exactly 
that of the Zfzst/e; and for the rest, we must not forget that the original 


g 


! 
48 PROF. J. RENDEL HARRIS. 


Greek is lost, and that we are wholly dependent on the translations and 
versions extant, regarding whose numerous variations and great corrup- 
tion there can be no differences of opinion, etc.”’—Supernatural Religion, 
Vol. I, p. 240. 


Now, it will be observed that in order to evade the acknowl- 
edgment of an almost word-for-word quotation, the writer 
adopts a. The unnatural opinion that a passage quoted is most 
likely to be taken from that one of two given passages which it 
least resembles; ὁ. He thinks it plausible, that if the Latin text 
of Ezra were emended so as to agree with the language in 
Matthew, it would then be possible to maintain that Barnabas 
quoted Zzra rather than Matthew, which is indeed plausible Ὁ 
enough; and c. He imagines that if the Greek text of 4 Lara 
were recovered, it might show that he was right; concerning 
which vain hope we can only remind him that an appeal has 
been made once already in this question to the authority of lost 
Greek texts and with what result may be seen above. 

And now, what light does the Zeaching throw upon this 
question? It will have been seen by the previous part of our 
analysis of the authenticity of the Tract, that the writer of the 
Epistle of Barnabas quotes a treatise which he characterizes by 
the terms Knowledge and Teaching; and that it is a written 
book, and in some sense an authority (since he uses the language 
ὅσα γέγραπται) and this book is the Teaching of the Apostles. 
Observe, then, that whether Barnabas quotes Matthew or not, he 
quotes a whole section from a Tract saturated with references to 
the Gospel of Matthew. And if this be the case, what becomes 
of the argument of the writer of Supernatural Religion? Noth- 
ing is left worth saving, except the statement that the term 
γέγραπται is sometimes applied to books not included in the 
modern Canon of Scripture. And the fact of the matter is, that 
as soon as our eyes are open, we shall not long be persuaded 
that the quotations in Barnabas from the Gospels are limited to 
a single passage. But into this question we do not desire to 
enter at present. 

But there is another wonderful instance of memeszs in the 
newly found Tract. On p. 249 of the same volume, the author 
of Supernatural Religion expresses himself as follows: 


“There can be no doubt that many scriptural texts have crept into 


THE GENGINENESS, ETC OR THE. TEACHING, 49 


early Christian writings which originally had no place there; and where 
attendant circumstances are suspicious, it is always well to remember the 
fact. An instance of the interpolation of which we speak is found in the 
Epistle of Barnabas. In one place the phrase, ‘Give to every one that 
asketh of thee’ (παντὶ τῷ αἰτουντί δε, did ov), occurs, not as a quotation, 
but merely woven into the Greek text, as it existed before the discovery of 
the Sinaitic MS. This phrase is the same as the precept in Le, vi, 30, 
although it was argued by some that, as no other trace of the Third 
Gospel existed in the Epistle, it was more probably an alteration of the 
text of Matt., v, 42. Omitting the phrase from the passage in the Epistle, 
the text reads as follows: ‘ Thou shalt not hesitate to give, neither shalt 
thou murmur when thou givest . . . . so shalt thou know who is the good 
Recompenser of the reward.’ The supposed quotation, inserted where we 
have left a blank, really interrupted the sense and repeated the previous 
injunction. The oldest MS., the Codex Sinaiticus, omits the quotation, 
and so ends the question; but it is afterwards inserted by another hand. 
Some pious scribe, in fact, seeing the relation of the passage to the Gos- 
pel, had added the words in the margin as a gloss, and they afterwards 
found their way into the text.” 


The writer did not know when he wrote this, that he was 
quoting the Teaching of the Apostles, and that the words which 
he so summarily ejects by means of his theory of the pious 
scribe, actually stand in the Zeaching, not indeed in the middle 
of the sentence discussed, but a little farther back in the text. 
And, of what use is the marginal-gloss theory as soon as it is 
proved that the Teaching of the Apostles quotes the Gospel of 
Luke? Are we to assume that another pious scribe has been at 
work upon the text of the Zeaching to insert the same pas- 
sage; which, by the bye, being a communistic passage, a com- 
parison of documents shows to have been one of the first 
things erased or omitted by those who subsequently worked 
up and commented upon the document? 

And again, the very same phenomenon repeats itself, ac- 
cording to our belief, in the Shepherd of Hermas, which we 
have tried to show quotes largely from a book which itself 
quotes largely from the Gospels. Yet the whole matter of 
the relations of the Shepherd to the Gospels is disposed of in 
less than two pages by the author of Supernatural Religion, 
who availed himself apparently of an admission of Tischendorf 
that there were no quotations in Hermas either from the Old 
or New Testament. I cannot understand how Tischendorf 


50 PROF. J. RENDEL HARRIS. 


came to make such an admission; but, at any rate, I shall claim 
the following: (a) That Hermas quotes the Teaching. (6) That 
the Zeaching quotes the Gospels. And as for quotations from 
the Old Testament, for the sake of reopening the question, it 
may be worth while to notice my recent demonstration in the 
Johns Hopkins University Circulars’ of an actual quotation made 
by Hermas from the Book of Daniel. But for the present we are 
concerned with the Zeaching of the Apostles; and we have tried 
to show the importance of the book in regard to the question of 
the authorship and date of the Gospels. This is all we can say 
here: Destructive criticism finds as little to hope from in the dis- 
covery of new documents as do advanced ecclesiastical views. 


1 No. 30. 


ARTICLE Ἐν, 


THE PHRASEOLOGY OF 7.15 TEACHING AS AN 
INDEX ΘΕ TTStAGE: 


BY ISAAC ΕΙΣ HALL, (“LEB Phebe. 
Philadelphia, Pa. 


HE more interesting aspects of the words and phraseology 

of the 7eaching appear in connection with biblical and 
patristic documents; especially those which, like the 7zwo Ways 
(adopting Hilgenfeld’s identification), the latter portion of the 
Epistle of Barnabas, and Book VII, of the Apostolical Constitu- 
tions, have a common source with, if not in, the Zeaching. But 
these aspects, together with the main critical question as to 
which document is prior, are to be left generally untouched in 
this paper. It is proposed here to deal with other matters; to 
examine the words and their combinations with respect to Greek 
literature in general, and to see whether any hint or conclusion 
about the age of the 7eachzng is indicated on that line. 

The first point to be looked at is its 


VOCABULARY. 


The length of the whole 4:day7 is about 2200 words. Its vo- 
cabulary comprises about 525 words. Of these all but 43 occur 
in the same sense in the New Testament. Two New Testament 
words occur in a sense different from that in which they are em- 
ployed there, and three phrases (each for a single noun-idea) 
occur which are not in the New Testament. These words and 
phrases will be most conveniently taken up alphabetically, as 
follows: 

ἀθανάτῳ, in ch. iv, 7. Frequent in classic Greek, from 


52 DRS TUSAAC Vie LAL 


Homer down; and the N. T. @@avacte (also classic) may be 
said to imply the prior existence and currency of the adjec- 
tive. But the word occurs twice in the apocryphal portions 
of the Septuagint ; viz., Wisdom, i, 15, δικαιοσύνη yap ἀθάνα- 
tos ἐστι; Sirach, xvii, 30 (24), οὐ ἀθάνατος υἱὸς ἀνθρώπου. 

αἰσχρολόγοϑ, in ch. iii, 3. The adjective is quoted in the 
lexicons from Pollux (Archeologus, czrvca A.D. 180). But the 
derived noun, αἰσχρολογία, occurs in Xenophon and Polybius, 
and once in the N. T. (Coloss., iii, 8). It appears not to occur 
in the LXX. 

ἀμφιβολέαν, in ch. xiv, 2. Classic, from Herodotus down; 
though the sense in Herodotus may be deemed a trifle different. 
Not in LXX. 

avranodorns, in ch. iv, 6. Not classic nor in LXX., though 
the verb and the noun in -ozs occur frequently in both, as well 
as in the N. T. The verbal adjective in -reoyv is classic; and 
the noun in -y@ is both classic, and in LXX. and N. T. The 
word occurs in the parallel passages of the Due Vie and the 
Epistle of Barnabas. 

αὐθάδεια, in ch. v, 5. Classic, especially in the tragedians, 
from Atschylus down. LXX., Jsatah, xxiv, 8 (clause omitted, 
however, in Roman edition, though in the Hebrew), as a render- 
ing of Nw. Also, Symmachus, Hccles., iii, 9. The adjective, 
implied in the noun, occurs in LXX. andN. T. (Gex., xlix, 3, 7; 
ΠΣ, 3,7; 2 Peter, i, 10): 

yoyyveos, in ch. ili, 6. Quoted in the lexicons from Arca- 
dius (A.D.—?). Also, in Theodotion, Prov., xvi, 28. (The 
ordinary form appears to be -yoyyvotns, as in Jude, 16; Theo- 
dotion, Prov., xxvi, 21; and Symmachus, Prov., xxvi, 22.) It 
occurs in the Due Vie, and Const. Afost., in the parallel 
passage. 

Siapopa, in ch. i, 1. Classic, frequent. In LXX., Wisd., 
vii, 20; 1 Macc., iii, 18. The Alexandrine edd. have it also in 
2 Mace., viii, 35, where the Roman has (better) διαφθορᾷ. The 
adjective, dza@popos, occurs in both LXX. and N. T. 

διγλωσσία, in ch. ii, 4. Neither classic nor in LXX.; but a 
word which might be formed from its adjective (when used in 
the same sense) by any speaker or writer. (See the next word.) 

δίγλωσσοϑ, in ch. ii, 4. Classic, but having there the sense 


THE PHRASEOLOGY OF THE TEACHING. 53 


of d2-lingual, or speaking two languages, so that the abstract 
noun would naturally not be found in classic remains. In later 
classics, the masculine, used as a noun, meant zxterpreter. Inthe 
LXX., however, the word occurs in the same sense as here, e.g., 
POU ΣΙ 15) StrAEN, νὴ 9 (E1), τα (17) 3 Vi, 2 (2) 3 xvi ge (A). 
Both this word and the preceding one are in the parallel passage 
in the Due Vie and the Ffrstle of Barnabas. 

διγνώμων, inch. ii, 4. Not in LXX., but in late classics in 
the form Oiyv@pos. (In the corresponding passage in the 
Episile of Barnabas and the Due Vie the &mmon reading is 
δίγνωμοκ, but the Sinaitic Codex reads διγνώμων. The Due 
Vi@ also has the classic form.) 

διπλοκαρδία, inch. v, 4. Not classic, nor in LXX. Appar- 
ently only in the passages parallel to this in the Zzvo Ways, 
Epistle of Barnabas, etc. 

Supvynoets, in ch. iv, 4. Not classic, nor in LXX. The 
adjective which it implies occurs in the N. T. (/ames, i, 8; iv 
3), and also in Philo Judzus. This word is retained in the 
Epistle of Barnabas, but changed to γίνου dipuyos in the Const. 
Apost. It occurs also in Herm. Pastor., Vis. 4, μὴ διφυχήσεις, 
‘Eppa; also Mand.9. Also, Clem. Rom., 2 Zpist. Cor., τ 

éumetacecos, in ch. xvi,6. Cited in the lexicons only from 
Plutarch (A.D. 80). The passage, in De Sera Numinis Vindicta, 
XXII., runs as follows (in Vol. IV, p. 37 of the Tauchnitz ed.): 

tas δὲ θορυβώδεις éueivas ἐκτρεπόμεναι, διεσήμαινον (as 
EO1KEV) συστολῇ μὲν eis EavTas TO δυσχεραῖνον, ἐκπετάσει δὲ 
καὶ διαχύσει τὸ χαῖρον καὶ προσιέμενον. The subject-matter 
is the action of certain disembodied souls. 

ἐνδεόμενον, in ch. iv, 7; v, 9. Frequent, in the same sense, 
in the classics, from Herodotus down. In LXX., Deut., viii, 9; 
P7ou., xxviii, -27. Other interpreters of the O. T., Deuz,, xv, 8, 
also. The common LXX. equivalent for the Hebrew word 
thus rendered (pn) is ὑστερέω. 

ἐπαοιδόξ, in ch, iii, 4. The classic form (in the same sense) 
is ἐπῳῷδόξ, which occurs in Plato and the Tragedians. The form 
here occurring is cited in the lexicons as from Manetho, the 
poet, B.C. 300." It occurs in the LX X., Danzel, 11, 27; v, 7,8 
(ed. Tischendorf); Jsa., xlvii, 9; Axod., vii, 11, 22; viii, 7, 18. 
In Theodotion, Danzel,'i, 20; ii, 2, 27; iv, 4 (7), 6 (9); v, 11. 


54 DR. ISAAC H. HALL. 


ἐριστιμόϑ, in ch. iii, 2. Classic, from Plato down. Not in 
OX: 

δηλοτυπία, in ch. v, 5. Classic, from A*schines to Plutarch. 
LXX., Numbers, v, 15, 18, 25, 20. 

θερμῶ (adjective), in ch. vii, 3. Common in all the classics. 
LX X., <foskua,. ix, 12)\(18) shoo) παχνὶ του}; and), otnes 
places. 

@pacos, in ch. iii, 9. Common throughout the classics. 
Vex Beck: xix, 73 Wesdom, xy 175 Wace, iv, 32.5 vig Ash 
2 Macc, v, 18: 

θρασύτης, in ch. v, 5. In good classics, as Demosthenes, 
Thucydides, Aristotle. 

θυμιπό, inch. iii, 2. Classic, in Aristotle, etc. Apparently 
not in LXX., though the noun is extremely common, and the 
verb, θυμόω, quite frequent. 

ἱδρωσάτω (MS., ipwrarw), in ch. i, 12. Classic, from 
Homer down. 

nanonOns, in ch. ii, 6. Classic, in Demosthenes, etc. 

x06 momAavos, in ch. xvi, 3. Not classic, nor in LXX. It 
expresses the idea of Rev., xii, 9; xili, 14; Xvili, 23; xix, 20; 
Boxer Se doe LOL 

μαθηματιπόξ, in ch. iii, 4. Classic, in a good sense. Ina 
bad sense, only late, and rather post-classical. But the use of 
mathematicus (and other indications) by the Roman writers, 
would tend to show that the word was used earlier in a bad 
sense. 

pioos inch. xvi, 3. Classic; in Plato, Xenophon, Thucydides, 

the Tragedians. LXX., 2 Samuel, xiii, 15 ; Psalm, xxiv (xxv), 19 
(20) ; cviii (cix), 3 (2), 5 (4); cxxxviii (cxxxix), 22 (21); Prov., 
Ἔα 13)» Accles., 1x, 1,0} Lzek., Xxil,' 205, / er, xxiv, ©. 

pynomannoers, in ch. ii. 3. Classic, from Herodotus down. 
LMM.) πε xxv, 125) SFoel, 11,9 (4); Zech., vii; 10; Prov; =x, 
24; Gen., 1, 15; each time representing a different Hebrew 
word. 

οἰωνοσπκόπο, in ch. iii, 4. Classic, in Euripides, etc. The — 
derived verb in -ew is more frequent. Not in LXX., but Sym- 
machus and Theodotion in /sa., xlvii, 13. 

παιδοφθορήσει, in ch. ii, 2. Not classic, nor in LXX. Clem. 
Alex., the Epistle of Barnabas, etc., who follow the A:day7 


THE PHRASEOLOGY OF THE TEACHING. 55 


or a like source, seem to suppose it to represent Scripture ; per- 
haps some such passage as Levit., xx, 13. 

πανθαμάρτητοι, in ch. v, 10. The classic form, if any 
occurs, would be, by analogy, 7avapaptytos, and mean ‘all- 
sinful.’ In that view, it may be considered asa late form. But 
the form zayvr- (which actually occurs in editions of the Epzstle 
of Barnabas), or πανθ-, might also be a classic form, and mean 
‘in all respects a sinner.’ 

παρόδιοϑ, inch. xii, 2. Late classic; in Plutarch; Hyperides 
(early) in Pollux. Not in LXX., though the noun, zapodos, 
occurs. 

περιμαθαίρων, in ch. iii, 4. Classic; in Plato, Aristotle, 
etc. LXX, Deut., xviii, το, περικαθαίρων τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ παὶ 
την θυγατέρα αὐτοῦ ἐν πυρί; Joshua, v, 4, in the sense of 
‘circumcise. The cognate (or equivalent) περιιαθαρίξω is 
used ini Yga., vi, 7, i thevsense, of; “expiate?; Deut.,\ xxx; 6, 
circumcise the heart; Levzt., xix, 23, circumcise uncleanness. 

ποθήσειϑ, in ch. iv, 3. Classic, frequent from Homer down. 
XX. Prov., vil, 15.5 Wesd., iv., 25 Vi, 12: (EX), 3) vill; 33 Ἐν 5,16. 

πονηρόφρων, in ch. iii. 6. Not classic nor in LXX, appar- 
ently. It occurs in Ecclesiastical writings, and in the parallel 
passage in Due Vie and Const. Apost. 

προσεξομολογησάμενοι, in ch. xiv. 1. Not found elsewhere, 
apparently, though the verb without zpos- is common enough 
in kX X.and N. T-. 

πυμνῶπ, adverb, in ch. xvi, 2. Frequent in classics after 
Homer (who uses zuxives). The adjective, wvxvos, occurs in 
ix xand N.T: 

oitiav, feminine noun, in ch. xiii, 5. Apparently occurring 
for the first time here. 

συσπῶν, in ch. iv, 5. Classic, in Plato, Xenophon, etc. 

ὑψηλόφθαλμοϑ, in ch. iii, 3. Not classic, nor apparently 
found elsewhere. It is replaced by a paraphrase in some of the 
parallel documents. 

pappanevosts, in ch. ii, 2. In the sense here presented, 
classic, from Herodotus down. LXX., Psa., lvii (Iviii), 6. (5); 
2 Chron., xxxil, (652 Mace. x, 15: In<all these. case$,it has 
reference to charms or witchcraft; not to poisons. 

pOopéeis, in ch. v, 8; xvi, 3. Perhaps in Sophocles. (See 


56 DR. ISAAC H. HALL. 


Liddell and. Scott's .Gr. Lex., s.v.) Later; in” Plutarch; An- 
thology, etc. 

χριστέμποροϑ, in ch. xii, 4. Only elsewhere, apparently, in 
Ecclesiastical writings, as Gregory Nazianzen. It also occurs 
in the Pseudo-Ignatius, Zp. Tral/. vi; also in Ep. Magnes. ix, 
where it is explained by the phrase xamnAevortes x. τ. λ., from 
B Cor a ΤῊΣ 

I have verified Bryennios’s citation of the above passages. 
At first I could not find them in common editions of the /ena- 
tian Epistles; but they are to be found in Coteler’s FPatres 
Apostolict (ed. Wetstein, Amst., 1724). Bryennios does not say 
that the passages are found in the App. Jen. in the MS. which 
contains the 4:day7. 

To this list add : 

εἰρηνεύσειϑ in transitive sense, which it must have here, in ch. 
iv, 3. Classic, late, in Dio Cassius and Babrius. Notin LXX. 
in that sense. The Due Vie has the same phrase, in the same 
sense; but the 22. Barnab. keeps the word intransitive by add- 
ing συνάγων. 

κατεσπήνωσαϑ in transitive sense with object of person, which 
it must have here, in ch. x, 2. Apparently not in classics. 
LXX., Ps., xxii (xxiii), 1 (2), és τόπον χλόης ἐκεῖ με μκατεσπή- 
voooev ; Jerem., Vil, 11 (12), οὗ πατεσκήνωσα TO ὄνομα μου 
Exel ἔμπροσθεν. 

Add also the phrases, δευτέρᾳ σαββάτων, πέμπτῃ [σαββά- 
τῶν]. τετράδα [σαββάτων], all in ch. viii, 1; which do not 
seem to be classic nor to occur in the LXX, (not even in Geneszs, 
i, 8, 23). They occur in Coust. Afost., in the parallel passage. 
This has been the style of naming the days of the week among 
the Greeks (and the Orientals also), ever since the week was 
recognized among them. No reason seems to have existed for 
the use of such phrases among those who wrote the earlier classic 
Greek. (It may be noted here that παρασπκευή, even in the 
N. T., means friday; retaining its etymological sense only in 
John, xix, 42; and not exclusively or unmistakably even there.) 
These phrases, moreover, are zames of the days of the week, 
and not mere ordinal numberings. For an illustration of the 
matter, an attempt to translatea Menology ora series of church- 
lesson captions, will well serve. It will be found impossible to 


THE PHRASEOLOGY OF THE TEACHING. 57 


avoid using the names of the week days without endless ambi- 
guity and confusion. The δευτεροπρώτῳ itself, of Luke, vi, 1, 
would scarcely be a greater puzzle than the translator would 
meet at almost every turn. 

To sum up the results of this examination of the extra-N. 
T. portion of the vocabulary, 30 words are classical; 24 (and 
perhaps 27) early, 6 later, or contemporary with the N. T.; and 
one other word is merely a sporadic form for a classic word, 
with nothing else to indicate its age. The LXX. contains 14 
of the words, or 15 if we take the Alexandrine text where the 
Roman is wanting, the dubious word being supplied by Sym- 
machus, however. Of the N. T. words used in an extra-N. T. 
sense, one occurs in that sense in both the classics and the 
LXX, and the other has that sense inthe LXX. The three 
phrases for week-day names certainly come down from N. T. 
times. There are only twelve words in the list—or in the whole 
Aiéayn- which we are not obliged, on the best of testimony, 
to pronounce as old as, or older than, the time of the New 
Testament. Of these twelve, one, dzyv@pwr, is in all proba- 
bility to be considered old, since it is merely an alternative form 
for the certainly older δέγνωμος; the other, σιτέαν, standing 
alone, would be thought late. 

Of the ten remaining, three appear to be unique in the 
Ζιδαχή. These are: κποσμοπλάνοϑ, προσεξομολογέομαι, ὑψη- 
λόφθαλμοΞ. The first is a natural compound, and a natural 
outgrowth of ideas which pervade the N. T., and which were 
uttered by Jesus himself. The second is likewise a natural 
compound, either Christian or Jewish, such as one familiar with 
either the LXX. or Christian precepts and practice might readily 
form. (Comp. Fames, v, 16.) The last is one which presents 
some difficulty. It seems to contain an idea similar to that in 
2 FPet., ii, 14. In the Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs 
(Second Century), as quoted by Bryennios, there occurs a sen- 
tence with some light: ovx ἐπόρνευσα ἐν μετεωρισμῷ ὀφθαλ. 
μῶν. These three words, certainly, show nothing inconsistent 
with the times of the New Testament itself. 

There remain to be considered the following seven: avtazo- 
δότη, διγλωσσία, διπλοκαρδία, Peas ὐϑο μευ πανθαμάρτη- 
TOs, πονηρόφρων, χριστέμποροΞ. All but the last two are 


538 DR. ISAAC H. HALL. 


found in that part of the 2. Barnadas (chs. xviii, xix, xx) 
which has been thought by many competent persons to 
be no part of the original Epistle, but added or compiled by 
some early scribe from another old composition (See, e.g., Cun- 
ningham’s Ep. of S. Barnabas, p. xviii). Most of them occur 
also in Const. Apost., VII; and three of them, including 
πονηρόφρων, in the Due Vie. As matter of criticism, it is 
pretty certain that the passages of the Ζιδαχῆ in which these 
words occur, are earlier than the parallels in the Due Vze and 
the Zp. Barnad.; while of course the Const. Apost. are certainly 
much later. (The four are not possibly independent.) The 
Pastor of Hermas is too plainly a sermon-like expansion in the 
parallel passages, to have a shadow of a claim to priority. 

But it is not proposed to go into that matter here. All the 
seven words are such as might easily have been in use among 
early Christians; or, except χριστέμποροϑ in the same sense, by 
readers of the LXX. The Greek classics, to be sure, could 
hardly have had any use for διγλωσσία (see above), nor for 
(παιδοφθόρος or) παιδοφθορέω in the sense here used, since a 
παιδιρα Was approved of by even Socrates. When he was falsely 
accused as Tous νέους διαφθείρων, it referred to matters quite 
different, as may be seen from Xenophon’s Mem., I, ii, 1-8. Of 
the others, χριστέμποροϑ is the only one which a griorz might 
not have been used by Greeks of the better classic period ; though 
there is little likelihood that any of them would be. Both their 
signification, and the fact that, so far as parallel ideas prevailed, 
we find other words in habitual use, seem to exclude them from 
any reasonable probability of being common classic words—un- 
less perhaps in the case of πονηρόφρων. But the fact that 
χριστέμποροξ and πονηρόφρων occur also in the Ecclesiastical 
writings cannot stand for a moment as an argument against their 
probable earlier use. The ideas they embody are New Testa- 
ment ones, and as natural to a primitive Christian as were John 
Bunyan’s strong expressions to him when he felt so terribly evil- 
minded, and was under that dreadful temptation to “sell 
Christ.” 

To sum up: The Vocabulary of the 4:day7 points clearly 
to New Testament times, or times not far removed there- 
from. Forty-nine fiftieths of it, at least, are proved positively 


THE PHRASEOLOGY OF THE TEACHING. 59 


to belong to a period as early as the New Testament itself, while 
the residue either speaks with its own voice of early Christian 
simplicity, or is declared by other voices to be in very early 
company. None of its words had as yet acquired a meaning 
that discloses hierarchical connection, or that reveals the devel- 
opments, for good or for ill, which the church attained already 
in the Second Century. Its words belong, in form and spirit, to 
the simple period of primitive Christianity. 

Two of its New Testament words, however, may call for 
some remark: εὐχαριστία and ἀπόστολος. The first may 
seem to some to have acquired a sense more technical than it 
has in the N. T., and to mean ¢he Lora’s Supper simply. But 
the transition is not yet complete (except perhaps at the 
last occurrence of the word in ch. ix., and the word has 
not lost its meaning of ‘thanksgiving’, although it is the 
‘thanksgiving’ at (or of) the Lord’s Supper. Moreover, that 
eucharistic service (thanksgiving) is of a character utterly dif- 
ferent from the eucharistic liturgy of any other document that 
has come down to us. A comparison with any, or with all, the 
ancient liturgies not only shows us nothing like it, but excites 
our wonder—not that sosimple a thanksgiving could be uttered 
over the broken bread and the cup, when there was little to 
guide but the simple memories of the first Lord’s Supper, but— 
that, 27. this simple service, or one after its model, was ever in 
use, so much could ever grow out of it, or such different matter 
ever replace it, as the ancient liturgies present. It is utterly 
unlike them all.—As to ἀπόστολος, the word was a general one 
before and apart from any special limitation to the Twelve; and 
while such an instance remains as that in 2 Cor., viii, 23 (ἀπόσ- 
Todor ἐκηλησιῶν), it is plain that it will not do to look upon this 
word as limited to the Twelve in the N. T., or as bearing here a 
meaning that can be called at all late in respect to primitive 
Christianity. 

Others might see more apparent exceptions, as xvp10T7s (ch. 
iv, 1); taking it in the sense of “the word of the Lord’’; but 
proof is needed that such alleged or supposed sense is actual (as 
a proper definition). The Const. Afost. paraphrase this passage ; 
and one of the MSS. of the Due Vie has Ἰησοῦς Xpioros in 
‘place of κυριότηξ. 


60 DR. ISAAC H. HALL. 


After the Vocabulary, it remains to note the 


PHRASEOLOGY AND STRUCTURE. 


In general, it is all simple, and such as belongs to the easier 
portions of the N. T. and the LXX., as well as of other writings 
that remain to show what the Greek language became after its 
departure from the classic models of greater beauty, and its re- 
ception as the language of general intercourse throughout the 
world. A few hebraisms occur, as might be expected. 

This general impression is one of the first that is obtained by 
reading the whole document. It is not intended here to exe) 
through every sentence of the ΖΔιδαχή, and give classic, N. T., 
or LXX. parallels for every combination of words. It is unnec- 
essary to attend to such points as that the title is a N. T. phrase 
(Acts, ii, 42), with the insertion of the N. T. Sadexa for form’s 
sake; or that the sub-title has a parallel for the first two words 
in 2 John, 9 (τῇ διδαχῇ τοῦ Χριστοῦ), while the rest is all good 
Greek construction and N. T. words, keeping carefully the N. T. 
use of διὰ with the genitive to express agency, a distinction not 
always observed in the classics, and notoriously neglected by 
Plato. It is intended here only to point out such special cases 
as may seem to require proof or comment, leaving the general 
mass, where affirmative proof is abundant, with the simple as- 
sertion here that the phraseology or syntax throughout has LX X. 
or N. T. or classic parallels or examples, unless otherwise speci- 
fied. Nor is it intended to discuss the Scripture citations or 
parallels as such, with a view to determining how far the com- 
poser of the 4:day7 used the N. T. and how much he depended 
upon tradition. Beyond the particulars here taken up (and per- 
haps within some of them), a student of the Ζηδαχη would be 
rather burdened than helped. There is little use in accumu- 
lating proofs of the obvious. 

The particulars noted will be taken up generally in the order 
in which they occur in the document, 

Chapter 1. The use of the expression “ Ways” for mode or 
character of life, is extremely ancient, and runs through all lan- 
guages. 

The expression τὴν ὁδὸν τῆς Cwips καὶ τὴν ὁδὸν τοῦ θανά- 
rovoccurs in LXX., Fer., xxi, 8. 


THE PHRASEOLOGY OF THE TEACHING. 61 


The phraseology μέα.... μία ἴοτ ἡ piv... ἡ δὲ, or ἡ μία 
... ἡ @AAn, etc., is justified by various classic expressions; as 
Ὁ piv... e568... eis δὲ (Odyss., III, 421), and eis way... 
eis δὲ (Aristotle). } 

The use of μεταξὺ with gen. after dtapopa may seem un- 
classical, but it is after the style of Plato, at least (Sympos. 202. 
a): ἢ oun ἤσθησαι, οτι ἔστιτι μεταξὺ Goptas καὶ ἀμαθίας. It 
is also after the style of Acts, xv, 9: καὶ οὐθὲν διέμρινε μεταξὺ 
ἡμῶν TE καὶ αὐτῶν. 

Looking down as far as ἱδρωσάτω, we find no phraseology 
or structure that is not actually found in the N. T., either in 
ipsissimts verbis or in perfect parallel. It is as well to note, 
however, that the negative shape of the latter clause of the 
Golden Rule has its parallel in LX X., Zobzt,iv, 15: καὶ ὃ μισεῖς 
μηδενὶ xoinons. Also, that the force of the passive δέδοσθαι, 
as deduced from N. T. usage, does not confine its agency to the 
persons addressed, but leaves it indefinite. 

An apparent exception to these remarks is found in the ex- 
pression νηστεύετε δὲ Uxip ...; but it is good Greek, to all 
appearance. I find only one case at all like it: LXX., Esther, 
iv, 16: νηστεύσατε ἐπ᾽ ἐμοί; but ὑπὲρ seems used in its own 
sense, tantamount finally to Esther’s ἐπ᾽, though differently 
shaded. The 22. Barnabas has the verb followed by a genitive 
of purpose or end: καὶ nv ΜωῦσῆΞ νηστεύων ἐν ὄρει Σινᾶ τοῦ 
λαβεῖν τὴν διαθήκην nvpiov. 

As to the proverb that closes the chapter, I find no construc- 
tion foreign to the N. T., except μέχριΞ av; but that occurs in 
the classics. As to the meaning of the proverb, I am inclined 
to think that it is as if the money were to burn the fingers, so 
to speak, till it were given away, or till some needy one could 
be found. 

Chapter ii. The expression ov φονεύσεις τέκνον ἐν φθορᾷ 
x.T.A. occurs also in the Due Κῶ. The wickedness named is 
often mentioned in the classics, especially the Roman ones. 
Interesting in comparison, but not perfect in parallel, is LXX., 
Wisdom, xii, 3-7. That the reference is to “antenatal homi- 
cide’, is confirmed by the quotations made by Bryennios in his 
note on this clause. The whole structure isa hebraism, after the 


62 DR. ISAAC H.- HALL. 


common fashion of the LXX. and N. T. For the meaning of 
γεννηθέν, see Matt., i, 20. 

The hebraism παγὶς θανάτου occurs in LXX., Psa., xvii 
(xviii),6; Prov., xiv, 27. For μεμεστωμέν οΚ5 followed by a dative, 
I thus far find no close example, but the construction and nice 
sense tally. 

The hebraism οὐ μισήσεις πάντα is one of common struc- 
ture. 

For περὶ ὧν with προσεύξῃ, there is a parallel in 1 ohn, 
v, 16. 

Nothing thus far in the syntax shows a date appreciably later 
than the N. T. 

Chapter iii. The expression ὁδηγεῖ moos I find nowhere 
else, the usual preposition being ezs (as farther on in the chap- 
ter), or ἐπι; but mposis here properly used with its own force, 
and could not be exchanged for either of the others without 
modifying the sense. (In /ofn, xvi, 13 Tischendorf’s text and 
Westcott and Hort’s margin have ἐν, but that would be another 
thing, referring to means or manner, not to the end.) 

For γένου in same sense, see (¢.g.) 1 Z7m., iv, 12; Rev., 111, 
2; also, plural, /as., 1, 22. 

The expression ἐπ with gen. after yey aq is classic (Aristotle) 
as well as N. T. (Yon, iii, 4-6; viii, 41, etc.). 

The sentence δώσεις τῇ φυχῇ σου θράσοϑ occurs (along 
with the preceding clause and all the rest of the chapter verba- 
tim) in the Due Vie ; but it has a parallel in LXX., Prov., xxix, 
17: καὶ δώσει κόσμον TH ψυχῇ Gov. For πολληθήσεται pera, 
with gen. of person, see LXX., Ruth, ii, 8: ὧδε κολλήθητι μετὰ 
τῶν πορασίων μου. 

The classic character of the last sentence in the chapter is 
rendered a little peculiar only by supplying the not very com- 
mon ἐνεργήματα; which, however, is the rhetorical flash that 
prepares for the report and echo of the next clause. 

Chapter iv. The expression οὐ Any πρόσωπον ἐλέγξαι has 
a close, though not exact, parallel in LXX., Szrach, xlii, 3 (1): 
μὴ λαβῃς πρόσωπον τοῦ ἁμαρτάνειν. In the next sentence, 
πότερον κ.τ.λ. (if necessary to mention it) has a parallel in 
John, vii, 17. 

The next sentence, M7) γένου κ.τ.λ. seems based on LXX., 


THE PHRASEOLOGY OF THE TEACHING. 63 


Strach, iv, 31; and here the Const. Apost. have rather returned 
to the old model than followed the Ζεδαχη or the Ep. Barnabas. 

The adj. Ovyrozs in the sense of things befitting mortals, 
occurs in Euripides, Pindar, etc. 

The structure πᾶν ὃ x.7.A. occurs in οί, vi, 37; Rom., 
xiv, 23 (compare Luke, xii, 10, 8). 

The expression ἐν συνειδήσει occurs in same sense in LXX., 
ΡΟ δ: 20: 

Chapter v. 1 do not find a strict parallel for ὧν μαμράν, 
without azo. But I apprehend that the structure is classically 
good; waxpayv being adverb as usual, and the genitive being one 
of separation. But later instances of the construction occur, 
as Polycarp, ad Phil. iii, iv, vi; Clem. Rom. Frag. iv. 

It is to be noted that ἀποστρεφόμενοι τὸν ἐνδεομενον has 
classic parallels, with the signification of turning away from, or 
abandoning, the object (middle with acc. of object). 

I find in this chapter no structure later than the N. T. All 
is classic, or LXX., or N. T.; and most frequently all three. 

Chapter vt. The phrase θεῶν νεμρῶν hasa parallel in Clem. 
Rom., 2 £p. Cor., iii, ἡμεῖς of Φῶντες τοῖς venpots Θεοῖς ov 
Θύομεν; but the idea is not foreign to the LXX. E.g., Levit., 
XXVi, 30: καὶ θήσω τὰ κῶλα ὑμῶν ἐπὶ τὰ κῶλα TOV εἰδώλων 
ὑμῶν. Also, Epist. Jeremiah, i, 26, ἀλλ᾽ ὥσπερ νεκροῖς τὰ 
δῶρα αὐτοῖς παρατίθεται, tas δὲ θυσίας αὐτῶν ἀποδόμενοι 
οὗ ἱερεῖς αυτῶν καταχρῶνται. And verse 70, τὸν αυτὸν τρό- 
πον καὶ τῇ ἐν κήπῳ ῥάμνῳ, ἐφ᾽ ns πᾶν ὄρνεον ἐπικάθηται, 
ὡσαύτωΞ δὲ καὶ venpe ἐρριμένῳ ἐν σκότει ἀφωμοίωνται ot 
Θεοὶ αὐτῶν ξύλινοι καὶ περίχρυσοι καὶ περιάργυροι. The 
force of these passages comes out all the stronger by compar- 
ing them with the preceding verses. 

Chapter vw. The first unusual expression is eis ἄλλο vdwp 
βάπτισον; since the “other water” must be the liquid of bap- 
tism, and the use of eis with βαπτίξδω, except to characterize 
the purpose or end of the baptism, must be rare. (Even in 
Josephus Ant. Jud., X, x, 4, βεβαπτισμένον eis ἀναισθησίαν 
καὶ ὕπνον, the liquid was wine, and the stupidity and sleep were 
the result.) Still, the structure is found in Strabo XII, v, 4 (ed. 
Meineke), Plutarch, and Hippocrates (besides later writers). 

The phrase πρὸ yids ἢ δύο is apparently late; occurring in 


64 DR. ISAAC H. HALL. 


Elian and Plutarch, though πρὸ πολλοῦ (absolute) is used by 
Herodotus. 

Chapter vit. Everything in this chapter looks rather to atime 
(or use) of Christian zapadoorsthan of written documents. The 
addition of the doxology—a different one from that of N. T. 
MSS. or editions—is simply supplying at the end of the Lord’s 
prayer what is put at the end of the other prayers in this docu- 
ment (see chaps. ix, x). It is also the doxology added (in sub- 
stance or form) to prayers in Clem. Rom. (¢.g., 1 Ep. Cor., xxii). 

The τὴν ὀφειλὴν in the Lord’s prayer agrees with no N. T. 
MS. known. - 

The structures in this chapter are all N. T. or classic. 

Chapter ix. The use of ἐπάνω, as here, in the sense of over 
simply, though rarely if ever found in the classics, is not uncom- 
mon inthe LXX., sometimes where it implies μοι, but generally 
implying above. £.g., Gen., xxii, Ὁ; [sa., xiv, 13, 14. 

The phrase ἀμπέλου Δαβὲδ may have been derived from 
John, xv, perhaps with an idea added from /sa., xi, 1. The 
thought appears enlarged later in Clem. Alex. (as quoted by 
Bryennios at this place): οὗτος [ὁ Ἰησοῦ] ὁ τὸν οἶνον, τὸ αἷμα, 
ths ἀμπέλου τῆς Δαβὶδ ἐγχέαΞ ἡμῖν; whence it appears that the 
vine was not David himself. 

Chapter x. The phrase οὗ xateounva@oas has been partly 
treated of above. οὗ must be (most naturally) for 6, by attrac- 
tion. Bryennios’s note’ at this place is shown, by the references 
above given, to be incorrect. 

Chapter xi. The hebraism in καὶ πάντα . . . οὐ πειράσετε 
is manifest, but of acommon sort. A difference is to be noted 
between the prophet who speaks in the Spirit, who is neither to 
be tested (tried) nor made the subject of inspection (discern- 
ment), and the one farther on, who is not to be judged at the 
bar of the Christiancommunity. The latter is δεδοκιμασμένοϑ, 
which is the old term (Demosthenes, Lysias, Xenophon) for ex- 
amination or scrutiny, as for office, enlistment in the cavalry 
service, etc. This hints that the congregation, formally or in- 
formally, were (in a measure, at least) the judges of the qualifi- 
cations of their ministers. 


lrovré6tiv, 6 ἐνέγραψας ἐν ταῖς καρδίας ἡμῶν, καταόπκην ώδας ἐν 
ἡμῖν: κατασκηνοῦν γὰρ τι που ἢ ἔν τινι οὐχ εὕρηται. 


THE PHRASEOLOGY OF THE TEACHING. 65 


"Amo... τρόπων γνωσθήσεται is a good classic structure ; 
ἀπὸ denoting on the one hand less direct agency than ὑπό, and, 
on the other, more remote or indefinite source than é&x. 

‘Opigwv for appoint, and τράπεδξαν for meal, are both good 
classic and N. T. words for their respective purposes. 

The hebraism πᾶς... ov is evident, and common. Per- 
haps the nearest English equivalent idiom would be: “And no 
prophet will appoint a meal [i.e. for the needy] and eat of it 
[himself] ; otherwise, he is a false prophet.” 

πριθήσεται ἐφ᾽ ὑμῶν has its structural parallel in Acts, xxv, 
9; 1 Cor., vi, 1,6; while μετὰ Θεοῦ has its parallel, at least 
nearly, in 1 Cor., vi, 6, 7; but if a different sense is taken, the 
expression is still good Greek. With ἐπέ, the following genitive 
denotes the tribunal adopted; with μετά, it indicates either pro- 
priety (as jurisdiction), or concern in the matter. This clause 
(μετὰ Θεοῦ x.7.A.) and the following probably refer to such 
matters as 1 Kzugs, xiii, and to the extraordinary doings of the 
prophets, which the Jewish people seem not to have dared to 
question, provided the prophet had authority. (See, e¢.g., Wark, 
xi, 28.) 

Chapter xii. Aonipwacarresis the old classic word, applied 
in the case of examination or scrutiny for office, enlistment as a 
soldier, etc., noted in ch. xi. 

Ζεξιὰν nat ἀριστερὰν is probably to be explained by 2 Cor., 
vi, 7; 2 7im., ii, 7, rather than Jonah, iv, 11; and is to be taken 
as referring to understanding in every direction. If it refers 
merely to ability to distinguish good from evil, the classics might 
help us, though their basal ideas in the matter (i.e., of lucky and 
unlucky) seem a long way off from those here presented. JZaiz., 
XxXv, 31-46 may give some light here. The Syriac writers some- 
times called the power of Satan, as exercised in this world, “ the 
power of the left hand”; i.e., of those who shall go to the left in 
the Day of Judgment. 

The idiom προσέχετε ἀπὸ with genitive, is N. T. (Matz., vii, 
EG ΣΙ 1} Luke, xii 1} ΧΣ AO), 

Chap. 4111. While there is no structure found in this chap- 
ter that does not occur in either the classics or the N. T., it is to be 
noted that the ideas of the sentence αὐτοὶ... ἀρχιερεῖς ὑμῶν 
occur later, expanded after a rather hierarchical fashion. (See 


ὲ 


66 DR. ISAAC H. HALL. 


. Bryennios’s note, with citations there given.) Here, the thought 
is simple, borrowing only from the O. T. andthe gospel. (I see 
no note of ¢zme in the use of the word apyzepets.) To the gos- 
pel, indeed, the phrase κατὰ τὴν ἐντολὴν seems to apply. 
(Comp. chap. xv, and the Scripture citation in this chap., which 
corresponds with 77α11., x, 10.) 

Chapter xiv. In this chapter the pleonasm κυριακὴν δὲ 
Κυρίου seems a little strange; but if it is nothing more than a 
pleonasm, no special consequence follows. If it was intended to 
make the distinction stronger between the first day of the week 
and the Jewish sabbath, it would not be very different from 
other early ideas. Compare Ep. Barnabas, xv, where the Lord’s 
Day is distinguished from the sabbaths, new moons, etc. If this 
is the correct idea, the genitive is emphatic, and has reference to 
something like the new creation, or ἄλλου κόσμου ἀρχὴν of 
Ep. Barnabas. 

Chapter xv. The first paragraph shows a primitive state of 
things in its matter; the word yezporovéw, for instance, being 
retained in its N. T., if not its classical sense. (Philo and others 
of the later writers agree with the N. T. in the sense of this word.) 
Also, the higher or divine appointment of the “ prophets and 
teachers” seems to be assumed as still recognized by the people. 
This marks a very early period; and makes us think of the time 
when Jesus was called διδάσκαλος. The ‘prophets’ here are 
still deemed successors of the ancient ones (compare ch. xi), and 
by no means subordinate to the “ bishops and deacons.” 

In the second paragraph (3), for the combination ἀστοχοῦντι 
nxata 1 do not find a corresponding example, but it seems en- 
tirely natural; taking the participle as absolute (as the word is 
sometimes used in the classics), and omitting the genitive, or 
the περὶ governing a following noun, which is commonly used 
to express the corpus delictz. 

Chapter xvt. The very natural phrase, perfectly consonant 
with classic structures, ὀσφύες... ἐκλυέσθωσαν, seems to 
have no parallel in the N. T., and scarcely a nearer one in the 
LXX. than Gen., xxvii, 40, καὶ éuAvons τὸν δυγὸν αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ 
τοῦ τραχήλου cov; or Josh., x, 6, μὴ éudvons tas χειράΞ σου; 
or Gen., xlix, 24, ἐξελυθη τὰ νεῦρα βραχιόνων χειρὸΞ αὐτῶν. 

The phrase κτέσις τῶν ἀνθρώπων (or its precise equivalent 


THE PHRASEOLOGY OF THE TEACHING. 67 


in the same sense) seems also absent from earlier writings; but 
it is quite natural, except that older analogous examples would 
make the genitive sudjectzve, which it cannot be here. But 
utiows has here one of its common N. T. senses, and is quite 
properly /zmzted by the genitive. 

The phrase σωθήσεται ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ τοῦ παταθέματος is 
readily explained from classic usage, as ‘‘[though (or, even)] 
under the curse itself.” The translation, “ from under the curse 
itself”, taken strictly, would be in accordance with Homeric 
usage, but not pertinent. It is justified, however, in ordinary 
English as equivalent to the other rendering; the “from,” in 
that case, being considered only as a means of emphasis, and 
not as strictly marking the mode, or the a quo, of deliverance. 

τὰ σημεῖα τῆς ἀληθείας presents no strangeness in structure, 
whatever be the nicety of construction or interpretation. 


It would be easy, but it would be a voluminous work, to 
furnish classic, or LXX, or N.T. parallels, in vocabulary or struc- 
ture, for the passages which have been passed over without 
special mention. The proof would be found most ample. But» 
granting that as fact, enough has been said to show that nothing 
in this line of investigation discloses the slightest point against 
the extremely early age of this composition. With more atten- 
tion to the comparison of parallel N. T. passages, where the 
origin of both must be the same, it would appear with much 
greater clearness that the whole air of the document is more 
redolent of oral teaching than of a written New Testament. 
For all that appears in the Vocabulary or Structure, the docu- 
ment might have been written before the books of the N. T. 
were all committed to writing. 

Did not the length of this paper preclude, some reasons would 
be given for supposing the composition to be not Egyptian ; but 
the subject must be left with barely the hint. 


ARTICLE V. 


COMMENTS ON JHE TEACHING. 


By ELIJAH R. CRAVEN, D.D., 
Pastor of the Third Presbyterian Church, Newark, N. J. 


HE last and greatest ‘find’ in Patristic literature is The 

Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, or as it may be styled 

the Didaché. That it isa genuine work, certainly not later than 

the first part of the Second Century, is abundantly shown by 

both external and internal evidence, the latter being the stronger. 

The external evidences will not be considered in this Article: 
the internal will appear in the progress of the discussion. 

The document, it may at once be remarked, is principally 
valuable because of its omissions; and it is because of these 
omissions, in comparison with the full statements of other docu- 
ments of acknowledged antiquity, that, chiefly, its genuine an- 
_tiquity becomes manifest. It is in place here to say that it 
forms the staple of Book VII of the Afostolical Constitutions, and 
also of chapters xix and xx of the Efzstle of Barnabas. It is 
said, also, to be the substratum of the Afostolic Epitome. From 
a comparison of these works, Krawutzky is said to have pre- 
sented to the public, in 1882, what now manifestly appears to 
be a remarkable reconstruction of the document. 

The Didaché may be conveniently divided into four parts— 
viz.: I. Practical, chaps. i-vi, with portions of xii, xiii, and 
xiv; II. Liturgical, chaps. vii-x, with a portion of xiv; III. 
Ministerial, chaps. xi-xv; IV. Eschatological, chap. xvi, with 
the prayers of chaps. ix and x. 

And here, before particularly considering the divisions just 
mentioned, attention should be called to the grand omissions. 


DR. ELIJAH R. GRAVEN. 69 


There is nothing save in connection with the matters mentioned, 
that can properly be styled doctrinal. Nothing is declared con- 
cerning the Divine Attributes, the Trinity, twofold Nature of 
Christ, the Atonement, the Sacrifice of Christ, the Work of the 
Spirit, Regeneration, Faith, or Sanctification. The only allusion 
to the Trinity is in the direction that the catechumen shall be 
baptized into the name of the Father, and the Son, and the 
Holy Ghost. Jesus is spoken of as Jesus Christ (without the 
article); the Lord; the Son or Servant (wais) of God; the Son 
of David. ‘The Book in its general tenor, its declarations and 
its omissions, singularly resembles the Synoptical Gospels and 
the Epistle of /ames. 

The absence of all doctrinal teaching may possibly be ex- 
plained on the hypothesis that there was at the time of the 
composition of the Didaché an extant Creed—the first six chap- 
ters of this Book treating of the Agenda, the Credenda being 
elsewhere provided for. And yet, there is a difficulty in the 
adoption of this hypothesis arising from the fact that there is 
no allusion to any such Creed in the directions concerning Bap- 
tism. These directions, which are contained in chap. vii, seem 
to contemplate the reading of the preceding chapters to the 
catechumen as the sole preliminary for the ordinance. This 
absence of ail requirement that the catechumen should receive 
instruction in the faith before baptism, and also that he should 
make a formal confession of faith as a prerequisite thereto, is 
the more conspicuous in view of the-fact that Book VII of the 
Apostolical Constitution, of which the Didaché is largely the sub- 
stratum, does contain a version of the (so-called) Apostles’ Creed 
to be used as a Confession before Baptism, together with gen- 
eral directions concerning the instruction of candidates for the 
ordinance. 

Attention will now be given to the particular divisions of 
the document. 


I. PRACTICAL. 


~ The first six chapters treat of the “Two Ways,” namely, 
those of Life and Death. Under the former are set forth the 
virtues to be practised; under the latter, the sins to be avoided. 
The scheme presented is remarkably complete and Evangelical. 


7O COMMENTS ON THE TEACHING. 


The ideas are largely those of our Lord as set forth in the Syn- 
optical Gospels, the language is similar to that of Jesus as re- 
corded especially in Matthew. It would seem as though the 
Gospel of the Evangelist just named, or a Gospel either written 
or oral on which that of Matthew was framed, was in the pos- 
session of the writer of the Didache. 

Some of the counsels, however, strike us with surprise; as, 
for instance, the following (here z¢alicized ) in ch. i: 


“Bless them that curse you, and pray for your enemies, and fast for 
them that persecute you.” « 


And again, a long evangelical exhortation concerning charity, 
which embodies the following, 


““Give to every one that asketh thee, and ask not back; for to all the 
Father wills that there be given of his own free gifts,” 


Closes with the words: 


“ But concerning this, also, it hath been said: Let thine alms sweat in 
thy hands until thou know to whom to give.” 


In the notes (p. 32) of Professors Hitchcock and Brown this is 
characterized as, “A very graphic injunction of carefulness in 
giving.” This interpretation seems to be in direct contradic- 
tion of the preceding injunctions, and also of that in ch. xii: 


« And let every one that cometh in ¢#e name of 276 Lord be received, 
and afterward ye shall prove and know him; for ye shall possess under- 
standing right and left.’’? 


Either, as it seems to me, the concluding sentence mentioned 
above, introduced as it is by the adversative ἀλλά, is the opin- 
ion of some teacher with whom the writer of the Didaché did 
not agree; or else there is an error in the text. As favoring 
the wes alternative is the fact that the original word translated 
‘sweat, ἱδρωσάτω, is a correction by Bryennios for the term 
ἱδρωτάτω. If the idea of ‘scalding’ ‘burning’ or ‘itching,’ be- 
getting the desire to get rid of the alms in the hand, could be 
given to the original term, this exhortation would be consistent 
with the other directions. 
The counsels in ch. ii, 


1 See also ch. iv. 


DR. ELIJAH καὶ CRAVEN. 71 


“Thou shalt not corrupt boys,. - . thou shalt not kill ἃ child by abor- 
tion nor put it to death when born,” 


Point to a horribly depraved state of society—a state, alas! 
largely reproduced in the present day. 
The exhortations 


“Thou shalt not use magic arts” (ch. ii), 
“Be not an augur; ... nor an enchanter, nor an astrologer’ (ch. iii), 


Indicate the belief of such practices as existing. 

The counsel against being a “ purifier (περικαθαίρων) has 
reference to some practice not now clearly understood. 

The exhortation in ch. iv, 


“Tf thou have Ζ7, thou shalt give by thy hands a ransom [λύτρωσιν] for 
thy sins,” 


Has been objected to as savoring of legalism. There is here 
a manifest reference to the Septuagint of Damzel, iv, 27 (24), 
where the sentence occurs “ καὶ tas apaptias, Gov ἐν ἐλεημο- 
σύναιΞ λύτρωσαι." 

In ch. iv, counsel is given to slaves [δοῦλοι]. As in the New 
Testament, slavery is recognized as an existing institution, with- 
out approbation or expressed condemnation. 

In the last sentence of ch. vi, the partaking of food offered 
to idols is expressly forbidden as “ἃ worship of dead gods.” 
There is here a manifest variance from the teaching of the 
Apostle Paul, in 1 Cor., viii, 1-13; x, 18-28, who declares that, 
in itself, such partaking was not sinful, and forbids it only under 
certain circumstances. This is one of the indications that the 
Didaché proceeded from the Jewish side of the church, that the 
writer was not acquainted with the Apzs¢/es of Paul. 


Tt. LITURGICAL: 


Chapters vii-x are Liturgical. Four ordinances are treated 
of, namely, Baptism, Fasting, Prayer, the Eucharist. 

1. Laptism.—The chapter on Baptism, ch. vii, will probably 
be the source of great controversy both on the mode and the 
subjects of that ordinance. While some of its sentences are 
preserved in Book VII of the Apostolic Constitutions, many are 
omitted, many added, and several materially altered. In the 


72 COMMENTS ON THE TEACHING. 


latter work there are two distinct parts devoted to this ordi- 
nance :—one general, ch. xxii, corresponding with ch. vii of the 
Didaché; another, chs. xxxix and xlv, which sets forth the pre- 
cedent instructions to be given the catechumen, the Creed to 
be adopted by him, the mode of administering the ordinance, 
the prayers to be used, etc. The directions in the Didaché on 
the entire subject are not merely simple but meagre. No direc- 
tions are given concerning the examination of the candidate or 
questions to be propounded ; no Creed is set forth to be recited. 
The simple direction is that after the reading to the catechumen 
the preceding six chapters, he is to be baptized “ Into the name 
of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.” 

As to the mode, it seems to be manifest that, whilst affusion 
was, under certain circumstances, permitted, the one ordinarily 
contemplated was either entire immersion, or affusion whilst 
the feet of the candidate were placed in water. The directions 
are, ‘Baptize (1) in [ev] living, or running water; (2) if thou 
hast not running water, into [zs] other water; (3) if thou canst 
not in [ἐν] cold then in [Ἐν] warm; but (4), if thou have neither, 
pour out water upon the head thrice.’ The conjunctive force of 
these interchanged prepositions, εν and ézs, seems to imply an 
entrance ἐμέο the water, either by immersion, or by placing the 
feet therein according to the idea exemplified in the ancient 
iconographs. 

That a quantity of water sufficient, at least, for the immer- 
sion of the feet was contemplated in the first three alternatives 
seems to be required by the fourth. 

The direction is, ‘If thou hast neither, pour water upon the 
head.” The word neither refers either to the cold water and 
warm water of the immediately preceding alternative, or to the 
running water and other water of the two preceding alternatives. 
It matters not to which we regard the reference as made. Take 
either—“If thou hast neither co/d water nor warm water, then 
pour water.” This is nonsense unless something more than the 
mere possession of co/d water or warm water was contemplated. 
In like manner, we have nonsense in the second reference un- 
less we suppose something more contemplated than the bare 
possession of water. “If thou hast neither ruunmmg water nor 
other water, then pour water.” If the baptizer had neither ruz- 


DR. ELIJAH R. CRAVEN. 73 


ning water nor other water, how was he to pour water? We 
can escape from nonsense only by hypothesizing that the last 
alternative supposes an inability to obtain water sufficient for 
the ordinary mode of administering the ordinance. 

There is one other matter of interest which may not be 
omitted in this connection, and which has a possible bearing 
on the mode contemplated, at least as showing that a consider- 
able quantity of water was ordinarily required for the ordinance. 
The third direction is, “ If thou canst not in cold then in warm.” 
There is a difficulty here. Had the position of the adjectives 
been reversed, had the sentence read, ‘If thou canst not in warm, 
then in cold,’ there would be no difficulty, but as it reads there 
is one. The direction seems to imply that if co/d water could 
not be obtained, warm might be. But, according to the ordi- 
nary use of the terms, if a man has warm water he can always 
obtain cold by letting the former stand in the open air. These 
adjectives, ψυχρόν and θερμόν, must have been used in some 
peculiar sense not now appreciated. May it not be that by cold 
water is intended that of an outside cistern, by warm that of a 
bath? As tending to confirm the affirmative of this question, 
it may be noted that the first meaning given by Liddell and 
Scott to θΘερμόϑ is, “hot, of the gentle heat of baths.” 

It is manifest that naught else than a trine affusion upon the 
head, into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy 
Ghost, was regarded by the writer of the Dzdaché as absolutely 
essential to the ordinance of Baptism. That this simple affusion 
was not the ordinary mode of administration is also manifest. 
Nothing decisive can be gathered from the document as to 
whether the whole body of the candidate was to be immersed 
or his feet to be placed in water. The true idea of this sacra- 
ment, and the essential mode of administration, are not to be de- 
termined from this document, but from the Scriptures. Into 
the discussion of the mode as contemplated in the Word of God 
it is not in place here to enter. 

It deserves special notice that nothing is said as to the mean- 
ing or effect of baptism. The sole allusion to the effect is at 
the close of the eucharistic service, ch. ix, where the unbaptized 
are prohibited from communing on the ground of the declara- 
tion of our Lord, “ Give not that which is holy to the dogs.” 


74 COMMENTS ON THE TEACHING. 


But the practice of the primitive church ina far more im- 
portant matter than that of the mode of baptism will seem to 
some to be indicated in the Didaché—namely, that the ordi- 
nance was administered only to catechumens, to those who had 
reached years of discretion. Manifestly the Baptism of ch. vii, 
the only chapter in which the ordinance is treated of, is that of 
those who act for themselves. It is true that no reference is 
made to any vows taken by the candidate or to any Confession 
made by him; but the first prescription of ch. vii, that the pre- 
ceding chapters should be read to him before baptism, and the 
last, “ Thou shalt command the baptized to fast for two or thtee 
days before,” forbid the idea that the baptism of infants could 
have been contemplated therein. The writer of this article be- 
lieves that the doctrine of Infant Baptism is deducible from 
Scripture. To the Inspired Oracles we must look for its de- 
fence. 

2. Fasting.—The second ordinance to which reference is 
made is Fasting, in ch. viii, Not only are occasional fastings 
commanded, as by this baptizer and catechumens before bap- 
tism, and on other extraordinary occasions, but regular fasting 
on the Fourth Day of the week and the Preparation [waga- 
σρευήν]. It may well be questioned whether the practice of 
the primitive church here set forth is not more in accordance 
with the teachings of our Lord, MJatt., vi, 16-18; ix, 15 ; xvii, 
21; and the practice of the Apostles, Acts, xiii, 2, 3; xiv, 23; 
1 Cor., vii, 5; than with our modern Protestant custom in this 
regard. 

It may here be remarked that the manifest allusion to the 
Pharisees under the term “hypocrites” (See Matz., vi, 16), and 
the use of the term Preparation for the Sixth Day of the week, 
are amongst the indices of a Jewish origin of the document. 

3. Prayer.—The third ordinance mentioned is Prayer. Con- 
cerning this it is to be observed: Furst, That the only private 
prayer treated of, and apparently the only one contemplated, is 
the Lord’s Prayer; Second, That this prayer was to be offered 
three times a day; Zhird, That the form as given, which differs 
but slightly from that given by Matthew, concludes with a 
doxology, nearly, yet not exactly, the one we find in the Gospel. 
In the Didaché, the word “kingdom” is omitted. 


DR. ELIJAH R. CRAVEN. 75 


The appearance of this doxology, it may be remarked, can 
hardly be regarded as indicating that it formed part of the 
Prayer as originally delivered by our Lord. A similar doxology 
appears at the close of each of the eucharistic prayers. It may 
have been a mere liturgical addition. 

4. The Eucharist—The fourth ordinance is that of the Lord’s 
Supper in chs. ix, x. This was styled the Eucharist, and was 
apparently observed, principally if not altogether, as an euchar- 
istic or thanksgiving service. The first thing that strikes us is 
the absence of all allusion to the ordinance as a commemoration 
or symbolization of the death of Christ, and all allusion to the 

sacrificial nature of his death. In the absence of such allusions 
there can, of course, be no doctrine of transubstantiation in it. — 

The cup is first administered (comp. Luke, xxvii, 17); then 
the bread, styled simply τὸ κλασμα, the broken. With the ad- 
ministration of each element a thanksgiving is connected, and 
with the latter a prayer also for the church. At the conclusion, 
ch. x, there is another thanksgiving for temporal and spiritual 
mercies, and another prayer for the church. Reference will 
again be made to these prayers in the conclusion of this Article. 

The language used in the thanksgivings and prayers seems to 
have been prescribed. Not only is it said in reference to both 
the initial and concluding thanksgiving, “Thus give thanks 
[ovrws evyapiotnoaté],” but at the close of the latter we find 
the direction, “ But permit the prophets [inspired ministers as 
will appear} to give thanks as much as they will.’ This per- 
mission of enlargement seems to confine the ordinary minister 
to the use of the form written. 

It would seem from ch. xiv, that the administration of the 
Eucharist took place, according to the custom of the Apostolic 
Church, every Lord’s Day. The administration was to be pre- 
ceded by a confession of sins. Reconciliation between parties 
at variance was strictly enjoined. None but baptized persons 
were permitted to commune. 

The additions to the order of administration in the Afostolic 
Constitutions were much more in accordance with the modern, 
and it may be added the scriptural, idea of the Sacrament. The 
whole service, as set forth in the latter work, is not only emi- 
nently Evangelical, but infinitely richer than the one in the 


76 COMMENTS ON THE TEACHING. 


Didaché. The same may be said concerning the order for the 
administration of baptism, with the exception of the prescrip- 
tion for the anointing with oil and the ceremonies connected 
with the anointing. 


III. MINISTERIAL. 


Chs. xi to xv, with the exception of xii and xiv, treat of the 
Ministry. 

1. Of Apostles and Prophets.—At first glance these would 
seem to be different names for the same office, since the apostle 
is spoken of as a “ prophet in ch. xi, “And let the apostle, when 
he goeth forth, take nothing except bread 20 suffice until he 
lodge; but if he ask money, he is a false prophet.” The reverse 
is not true, however; some prophets are distinguished from 
apostles. The apostle might lodge in the same place only a 
single day, or at most two, ch. xi; the mere prophet, however, 
might, according to ch. xiii, settle in a particular place; “ Every 
true prophet that wisheth to reside among you, is worthy of his 
food.” From this it appears that whilst every apostle was a 
prophet, every prophet was not an apostle. 

The prophets (using the term in its generic sense as including 
the apostles) were inspired. They were those who spoke in 
spirit [ἐν πνεύματι without the article] and were not to be 
judged, as to their utterances, by men. Manifestly the prophetic 
office was that contemplated by Paul in 1 Cor. xii, 28 and xiv. 

Judging the utterances of prophets (i.e., true prophets) was 
an unpardonable sin. In ch. xi it is written, ‘‘ And every prophet 
who speaketh in spirit [ἐν πνεύματι] ye shall not try nor judge, 
for every sin shall be forgiven, but this sin shall not be forgiven.” 
This is in accordance with the words of our Lord, 

“Verily, I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, 
and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme: but he that shall 
blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in dan- 


ger of eternal damnation [or sin]: because they said, He hath an unclean 
spirit.” —JVarf, iii, 28-30. 


The forbidding of judgment was confined to the utterances of 
true prophets, and the sin consisted in attributing utterances 


under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, to a devil. This is 
evident not only from the nature of the case, but also from the 


DR. ELIJAH R. CRAVEN. 77 


immediately following directions as to the mode of trying one 
who professed to be a prophet of the Lord. He was to be tried, 
not by his words, but by his works, 

“Not every one, however, that speaketh in spirit, is a prophet [i.e., a 


true prophet], but oy if he have the ways of tke Lord. From their ways, 
then, shall the false prophet and the prophet be known.” 


The words just quoted remind us of the words of our Lord, 


“ Beware of false prophets . . . ye shall know them by their fruits.”— 
Matt., vii, 15. 


And words of the beloved disciple, 
“ Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are 


of God; because many false prophets are gone out into the world,”— 
1 Fohn, iv, τ. 


And also of the commendation bestowed upon the Church of 
Ephesus, 


“Thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast - 
found them liars.” —ev., ii, 2. 


The apostles were probably ministers of the class of true 
apostles whose existence is implied in Rev., ii, 2; not of the 
Twelve, but itinerant, inspired teachers. What were their spe- 
cial prerogatives or duties above those of mere prophets are not 
set forth in the Didaché. It has been suggested that they were 
in the primitive church, before the preparation and multiplica- 
tion of written Gospels, inspired declarers of the oral gospel. 
For the performance of this work, continuance in one place for 
a single day would be sufficient. On this point, however, noth- 
ing can be positively determined. One thing is manifest, the 
itinerating apostles could not have been diocesan bishops. 

The ordinary ministers of the church were Bishops and 
Deacons (ch. xv), the two orders recognized in the New Testa- 
ment and by Clement of Rome. The Didaché knows nothing 
of Prelacy. Nor does it set forth a system of church govern- 
ment accordant with what is generally known as Presbyterian- 
ism, that is, the association of contiguous churches under the 
government of a Presbytery, and Presbyteries themselves sub- 
ject to the authority of larger ecclesiastical bodies. There is 
nothing in the Dzdaché necessarily inconsistent with the exist- 


78 COMMENTS ON THE TEACHING. 


ence of such association; and, on the other hand, there is noth- 
ing to show that such association existed. As in the case of 
baptism, the principles of church government must be deduced 
from the Scriptures. 

The only ordination of bishops and deacons apparently con- 
templated is appointment [χειροτονήσετε] by the church, ch. xv. 
If it be contended that χειροτονήσετε means ordination by the 
laying on of hands, still, for aught that appears from the Didac- 
hé, it is ordination by the church. 

Bishops and deacons are spoken of as rendering “ the service 
of prophets and teachers,” ch. xv. Are we to understand by 
this that there were two classes of prophets, the one inspired 
and the other not? Or, that some of the settled ministry might 
be inspired and so rank with prophets, and that others were 
mere teachers, uninspired? The latter seems to be the true 
idea, the more especially as ch. xiii recognizes that prophets 
might be settled in particular churches. 

Prophets were to have the first fruits for their support, ch. 
xiii. What proportion thereof is not stated. No provision 
seems to have been made for the ordinary ministry. It is de- 
clared in ch. xiii, “If ye have no prophet give (the first fruits) 
to the poor.”” From this it also appears that a church might be 
without a settled prophet. 


IV. ESCHATOLOGICAL. 


Chapter xvi, together with the eucharistic prayers of chs. ix 
and x, are eschatological. The entire field of Last Things is 
not traversed. The teaching beginning with the exhortation, 
ch. xvi, 


“Watch for your life; let your lamps not be quenched, and your loins 
not be loosed, but be ye ready; for ye know not the hour in which our 
Lord cometh,” 


Is substantially that of Jesus as recorded in Matt., xxiv; Mark, 
xiii, and Luke, xxi. The series of awful events foretold the 
multiplication of false prophets and corrupters; the decay of 
love; the increase of lawlessness; persecution; the appearance 
of the false Christ, doing signs and wonders; the period of fear- 
ful trial; the appearing of the signs of the truth, an opening in 


DR. ELIJAH R. CRAVEN. 79 


the heaven, the trumpet’s sound, the resurrection of the right- 
eous dead,—culminates in the coming of the Lord upon the 
clouds of heaven. And this coming, as is implied in the eu- 
charistic prayer of ch. x, is to be succeeded by the gathering of 
the church into the Kingdom or Basileia. 

This concluding chapter is specially valuable in view of 
its bearing on the subjects of the period of the Second Advent, 
the special Resurrection of the righteous dead, and the Millen- 
nium. These subjects are so intimately connected that it is 
difficult to treat of them separately. 

In the concluding note of their edition of the Dzdaché, Pro- 
fessors Hitchcock and Brown write as follows: 


“The document concludes with a vision of the Lord coming upon the 
clouds of heaven, and all the saints with him. The resurrection is of the 
dead, vexpayr, though ‘not of all the dead.’ Not a word is said of any 
second resurrection. If there is to be a second resurrection, it is only im- 
plied. Of course, no interval is indicated. Premillenarianism, according- 
ly, is not directly, perhaps not even indirectly, taught. Following the lead 
of the New Testament, as in J/at#z., xxiv, 31, and in 1 7%ess., iv, 13-18, our 
document may, after all, only be emphasizing the resurrection of the 
righteous.” 


In an article, recently published in The ludependent, the 
present writer remarked on this note: 


“It is freely admitted that Premillenarianism is not ‘taught’ in the 
chapter referred to. But, is it too much to claim that, the editors them- 
selves being witnesses, it is suggested? If not, why was the note written? 
In point of fact nothing is directly taught in the document concerning a 
Millennium (by that name) at any period, either before or after the Second 
Advent. But it must be manifest to every careful reader that the teaching 
is utterly inconsistent with the now prevalent doctrine concerning the 
Millennium—namely, that it is to precede the coming of the Lord.” 


The word Millennium, as is well known, is a Latin term, 
meaning simply @ thousand years. It is a generic.term, indicat- 
ing a period of a thousand years of. any kind either of blessed- 
ness or, misery,—a term that has been employed by Latin theo- 
logians, and their successors in the Western Churches, to indi- 
cate the period of righteousness and blessedness foretold in 
Rev., xx, 1-6. John, in prophetic vision, beheld the resurrec- 
tion of a portion of the dead, which he styled “the first resur- 


80 COMMENTS ON THE TEACHING. 


rection,” the subjects of which “lived and reigned [ἐβασίλευ- 
σαν] with Christ a thousand years [χίλια ἕτη]." 

Now, using the term Millennium in the specific sense in 
which it is employed in the present day, it must be manifest to 
every thoughtful student of the Didaché that its writers could 
not have believed that such a period of peace and blessedness 
as it connotes was to precede the Advent of the Lord. 

Chapter xvi begins with the exhortation, 


“Watch for your life; let your lamps not be quenched, and your loins 
not be loosed, but be ye ready; for ye know not the hour in which our 
Lord cometh.” 


The succeeding words all point to increasing wickedness in the 
world and in the church, and to a period of fiery trial which was 
to be terminated by the Coming of the Lord accompanied by 
the risen saints. If the writers of the Dzdaché believed in an 
earthly period of righteousness and blessedness, a Wzllennium, 
it must have been one which they regarded as subsequent to the 
Advent. On this point there cannot be a rational doubt. Pre- 
millenarianism may not be affirmed in the document, but most 
certainly Postmillenarianism is impliedly denied. 

But did they believe that there was to be such a period as is 
now indicated by the term ‘Millennium’? The evidence that 
they did so arises from several considerations. It will be im- 
possible, of course, at the close of so extended an Article as this 
to present a full discussion of this important subject. No more 
can be done than to indicate lines of thought. 

1. The first point that will be mentioned is the allusion at the 
close of the eucharistic prayer of ch. x to the gathering of the 
saints at the Coming of the Lord into the Kingdom or Basileia: 

“Remember, Lord, thy church, to deliver it from every evil and to 
make it perfect in thy love; and do Thou gather it from the four winds, 


the sanctified church, into thy Kingdom, which Thou hast prepared for it. 
. Maranatha [Our Lord cometh]. Amen.” 


In this connection should be read also the prayer of ch. ix: 


“Just as this broken bread was scattered upon the hills, and was gath- 
ered together and became one, so let thy church be See. together from 
the ends of the earth into thy Kingdom.” 


The authors of the Didaché manifestly did not apply the 


DR. ELIJAH R. CRAVEN. 8I 


term ‘Kingdom’ to the church in its pre-Advent condition; the 
church was to be gathered into the Kingdom at the Coming of 
the Lord. The line of thought pursued is apparently that of 
Jesus in his eschatological discourse on the Mount of Olives, in 
which He teaches that a period of trial is to be followed by the 
Advent, and this by the establishment of the Kingdom. On 
this last point see the passages, 


“When ye see these things know that the kingdom of God is nigh at 
hand.” —Zzke, xxi, 31. 

“Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins,” etc. ; 
—Matt., xxv,1. “Inherit the kingdom prepared for you.’’—verse 31, 


It may here be remarked that in this special use of the term the 
Didaché agrees with all extant patristic writings previous to the 
civil establishment of the church by the Emperor Constantine. 
The writer of this Article has been unable to discover a single 
passage in these writings in which it is applied to the pre-Ad- 
vent church. 

It may, however, be questioned whether the authors of the 
Didaché used the term ‘ Basileia’ to denote an earthly condition 
of the church. That it is used in Scripture as indicating an 
earthly state, at least inits first stage, seems to lie on the surface. 
The presumption certainly is that it was so used in the Didacheé. 

2. The second point that will be noticed is the declaration 
concerning a special resurrection of the saints at the Advent. 
The document reads, 

“ And then shall appear the signs of the truth; first, #He sign of an 
opening in heaven, then ¢he sign of the sound of a trumpet, and third, 


the resurrection of ¢ie dead; not of all, however, but as was said: The 
Lord shall come and all the saints with Him.” 


In their comment on this passage, the editors above quote this 
remark, 

“Not a word is said of any second resurrection, it is only implied. Of 
course, no interval is indicated. . . . Following the lead of the New Testa- 


ment, as in Maz¢t., xxiv, 31, and in 1 Thess., iv, 13-18, our document may, 
after all, only be emphasizing the resurrection of the righteous.” 


It is, of course, manifest upon reading that no second resur- 
rection is mentioned in the Dzdaché, and, of course, that no inter- 
valisindicated. But isit not equally manifest that the language 


$2 COMMENTS ON THE TEACHING. 


employed could scarcely have been used had not some interval 
been contemplated? The language is, 


“Third, zHe resurrection of z4e dead; not of all, however, but as was 
said: The Lord shall come and all the saints with Him.” 


It is unnatural to suppose that such language would have been 
employed merely to emphasize the fact of the resurrection of 
the righteous. 

The form of expression used by the editors certainly sug- 
gests the idea that, in their judgment, in 77α11., xxiv, 31, and 1 
Thess., iv, 13-18, the resurrection of the righteous is merely em- 
phasized. It is true that did these passages stand alone they 
might be interpreted as consistent with such anidea. But they 
do not stand alone; and to determine ‘the lead of the New 
Testament ’’ we must consider them if connection with other 
texts bearing on the same subject. There are several classes of 
passages which give significant instruction on this point. 

(1). Those in which Jesus and the Apostle Paul speak of a 
special resurrection which is to be striven after, and which is 
characterized as a resurrection from the dead [ἐπ vexp@v]. Our 
Lord declares (J/att., xx, 35): 


“ They that attain that world [αξῶν] and the resurrection from the dead 
[τῆς ἀναστάσεως τῆς ἐξ νεκρῶν] neither marry nor are given in marriage.” 


The language of the Apostle Paul is exceedingly strong ; he de- 
clares that his great striving was that he 


“Might attain [not as in King James’ version, to the resurrection of the dead, 
but] to the resurrection out from among the dead (εἐς τὴν ἐξανασταόσιν τὴν 
ἐκ vexpov,’—Ph71,, iii, 11). 


(2). A second class of passages is, Acts, xxiv, 15, in compari- 
son with I Cor., xv. 22, 22. In the former the Apostle Paul de- 
clared that he believed in a resurrection of a// the dead, “ both 
of the just and unjust ;” in the latter he speaks of ‘“orders”’ in 
the resurrection, “Christ the first fruits, afterward they that are 
Christ’s at his coming.” It is true that he does not specify the 
third order. It is, however, scarcely possible to resist the con- 
clusion that the resurrection of these was to take place at “ the 
end.” And this conclusion is enforced by the fact that the res- 


DR. ELIJAH R. CRAVEN. 33 


urrections of the first and second orders are separated by an in- 
terval, certainly, of nearly two thousand years. 

(3). The third class of passages is, Rev., xx, 4-5 in compari- 
son with all those that have already been mentioned. In the 
passage in the Afocalypse John writes of ¢qwo resurrections sepa- 
rated by a thousand years, during which period the subjects of 
the former reign with Christ on the earth (cf. Rev., v, 10). Those 
subjects are described as possessing the characteristics of the 
persons mentioned in JZa?t., xxiv, 31, 1 Thess. iv, 13-18, and I 
Cor., xv, 23; and manifestly the resurrection contemplated must 
be out from among the rest of the dead. 

In view of all these Scriptures it may safely be claimed that 
“the lead of the New Testament” favors the idea of two resur- 
rections—the first that of the saints to reign on earth with Christ, 
at the period of the Advent, the second that of the unjust after 
a considerable interval. The teaching of the Dzdaché, so far as 
it goes, is manifestly consistent with this view. It is not claimed 
that the Scriptures quoted were in the hands of the authors of 
the document. Indeed, it is probable from the lack of direct 
quotation from them, that at least the Epzstles to the Corinthians 
and the Afocalypse had not been written at the time of its com- 
position, but the doctrines of Christ and his Apostles, which we 
have in Gospels and Epistles, were well known in the churches 
and were constantly affirmed by inspired prophets. 

Again, it may be remarked that the presumption is that the 
authors of the Dzdaché were familiar with the doctrine of Christ 
and his Apostles. 

3. The two-fold presumption arising from the foregoing con- 
siderations is heightened by the probable source of the conclud- 
ing words of the sentence which sets forth the last of the great 
events accompanying the Advent. 


“Third, ¢#e resurrection of ¢#e dead; not of all, however, but as was 
said: The Lord will come and all the saints with Him.” 


The quotation is probably from Zech., xiv, 5, where it is written, 
‘“‘ The Lord my God shall come, and all the saints with Thee.” 
But the Advent spoken of by the Prophet is to be followed by 


a period of earthly blessedness and glory. In asucceeding verse 
we read (xiv, Io), 


84 COMMENTS ON THE TEACHING. 


“In that day shall there be upon the bells of the horses, Holiness unto 
the Lord; and the pots of the Lord’s house shall be like the bells before 
the altar.” 


This is the period of the Kingdom foretold by Prophets and 
Apostles, and by the Lord himself. 

In conclusion it may be remarked: 

First.—The entire style of the Book, its simplicity, its accord- 
ance in doctrine with Scripture, its freedom from errors which 
we know sprung up early in the church, manifest its great anti- 
quity. At the same time its accordance in thought with Scrip- 
ture, coupled with the lack of quotation from the Scriptures 
as we have them, seems to indicate a composition in the First 
Century, before the writing of our extant Gospels and Epistles. 

Second.—The question has been asked, What is the import- 
ance of such a Book? As well might it be asked what is the 
importance of Lexicons, Commentaries, Books of Travel in Bible 
Lands, Cotemporaneous History. These are not inspired 
Scriptures, and yet they are of importance in the elucidation 
of Scripture. And beyond this, the Dzdaché, hoar with anti- 
quity, and written whilst the recollection of the oral teachings 
of Apostles and apostolic men yet lingered with the church, 
though not itself inspired, yet, by its accordance with 
our extant Scriptures, bears most important testimony to their 
authenticity and the purity of their transmission. 


* ᾿ ve γ 


ray 
y 
᾿ 
‘ 
aol 
ἣν 
i 
rl 
7 
ta 
Ἷ 
f 


ai 


Y 
» 


A, 


h 


a 


5" 
i 

᾿ 

i 


ἣν 


1 


νων 
ΤΥ “ΜΕ i ac 


ἔν 


᾿ I ey 
1) ᾿ r i 
J 
ley Ἷ 
{ Ἷ Ἀ ἵ ᾿ Ἷ « 
{ j i wit Nien ΔῊΝ 
f jr" y ἡ a 
a i \ ἵ i j Ceres ἢ 
‘ υ ἂ * ἰὴ i 
ted ro i sila πὰ τε n 
\ i as ee 
4 i Py: 
i 
' fl va i 
ἢ i δον j hy 


AF ' 
᾿ f 
he, : 
rh 
"Ὲ le 
Ψ 
Te, ᾿ A - 
vee ‘ tae 7 al 
ἌΝΩ ee 
: vy AS . 
Ἢ Ves 
τὴ ΑΝ» 
᾿ ΤΣ 
A ᾿ ὅσα, 
ΠΝ ‘ 
a | Pog 
y ¥ 
ed") , 
' t 
i ἢ 
il 
“ἢ 
γ᾽ 
"ΑΙ 
| 
aa 
\ 
ἢ ᾿ 
᾿ 
᾿ ᾿: 
‘ 
F 
4 
\ 
d t 
i 
aN 
wr 
om 
a Ἷ Τ 
Nah hae 
it Ἷ ' 
ae ΄ 
i 
᾿ 5 
f 
᾿ . 
Pry . 
= f 
Fy 
‘ / 
} ᾿ ᾿ 
Ψ a ' 
iil 
ν᾽" ᾿ ' 
© “4 
1 
if 
j 
ἢ | ᾿ ἡ 
i 
ἡ hha ea ᾿ 


Enna 
a 
ey ale: 


Date Due 


ΩΝ 
ἮΝ mre 


ssh TU 
Ng ἡ 


ἐὰν 


ὁ τς the! let FS pn ον od Ἂν ὑπ αὶ ΚΡ oy! a ῳῚ ee ' | = 
ἐν Fae i = rate, "3 “" παν ον ΤᾺΝ το = πρίρέτεετς 


ν δ 
εὔχου ταν να Τ᾿ 


A = 

~ < - = - el ie Sanat iP = Oty ραν το 

ΝΥ ς , r < a” ate »,» «ἢ man Aang 5 OO thes tre Se owl, ol - a | , | | 3 

Σ a Fae 5:2 ὙΦ Ov Lae aap ne εν an nm == | — : 
A Sree ER eee ee =o ; ; erat ee 

é i. oe . ; 3 3 | | | | 

woe oe | = - | | 


el Aa i> sie | ᾿ 


i> 


μος 
τὰ οδουν' ἐδ 


i) 


ill 


00 


twelve apostles 
I nary-Speer 
29 4779 


" 


eological Semi 


rinceton The 


| 


i 


| 


wv 
«ἂς 
~ 
-- 
ο 
D 
© 
= 
vo 
o 
o 
μ- 


© 
foe] 
τι 
ΟἿ 
= 
Ww) 
Tt 
N 
= === 
ea) 

? τ Ξ 


